The quest for healthier food options is reshaping the consumer landscape, pushing CPG brands to re-evaluate their formulations and marketing strategies. However, the burgeoning demand for "clean label" and "non-ultra-processed" foods presents a complex puzzle for food manufacturers, entangled in consumer perceptions, ingredient functionality, and the ever-present challenge of affordability.
This article delves into the intricacies of these evolving consumer preferences, drawing insights from a recent Food Dive event that explored how health and wellness trends are driving innovation in the food industry. While consumers increasingly gravitate towards products they perceive as natural and free from artificial additives, the path to achieving these attributes is far from straightforward for food makers.
The Consumer Conundrum: Defining "Clean" and "Ultra-Processed"
The current discourse surrounding food choices is often dominated by two key terms: "clean label" and "ultra-processed." While these concepts are frequently used interchangeably in public conversation, their precise definitions remain elusive, leading to significant confusion for both consumers and the industry. This ambiguity creates a fertile ground for misinterpretations and complicates the efforts of brands striving to meet consumer expectations.
Mimi Bonnett, Senior Director of Insights at Innova Market Insights, highlighted this disconnect during a recent virtual event hosted by Food Dive. She explained that consumers typically associate "clean label" with the presence of natural ingredients and the absence of anything they perceive as artificial. This often translates to preferences for shorter ingredient lists and a complete avoidance of artificial colors, flavors, and preservatives.
"Fundamentally, consumers are equating clean label with nothing that they don’t recognize," Bonnett stated. "So things that they can easily pronounce or actually understand, or maybe even have in their pantry themselves. They’re not necessarily looking for something specific in short, but things that they don’t have to be worried about."
This consumer-centric definition places a strong emphasis on ingredient familiarity and perceived safety. It suggests that consumers are less concerned with the technical nuances of food processing and more focused on the tangible components of a product. The sentiment is one of seeking reassurance, a desire for food that feels transparent and uncomplicated.
However, the increasing adoption of terms like "non-ultra-processed" by food companies is further blurring the lines. Bonnett pointed out that consumers often apply the same evaluative lens to both "non-ultra-processed" and "clean label" claims, despite the distinct underlying concepts.
"‘Processed’ is in the term, but it’s not about the process at all," Bonnett elaborated. "In fact, consumers don’t really understand the processes that foods go through, so they’re really using those same ingredients to drive that decision."
This observation is critical. It suggests that the consumer’s decision-making process is primarily ingredient-driven, rather than being informed by a nuanced understanding of food science and manufacturing techniques. This reliance on ingredient recognition as a proxy for health and safety presents a significant challenge for brands that employ legitimate and beneficial processing methods.
Innova’s research further underscores this point, revealing that a substantial portion of consumers who actively avoid ultra-processed foods are doing so by eschewing specific ingredients, rather than by scrutinizing the processing methods themselves. This indicates a clear preference for avoidance-based decision-making – consumers are often more certain about what they don’t want than what they do want. This reactive approach to food choices can make it difficult for brands to proactively communicate the value of their products.
Beyond ingredient lists, Bonnett also identified a broader "murkiness" in consumer understanding regarding the origin of food. This lack of transparency about where food comes from can exacerbate consumer anxieties, making it even more crucial for food companies to provide clear and comprehensive information about their ingredients, regardless of whether a product carries a "clean label" designation. The more clarity a brand can offer, the more it can build trust and alleviate consumer concerns.
The Reformulation Tightrope: Balancing Functionality, Taste, and Cost
The aspiration for a "clean label" is far from a simple exercise in ingredient reduction. Jay Bunte, Senior Director for Ingredion’s global product portfolio in corn and clean label texture solutions, emphasized this point during the Food Dive event, highlighting the complex balancing act that food manufacturers face.
"It’s not as simple as just taking things out," Bunte stated. "Unfortunately, if that were the case, a lot of things would taste a lot worse, and the eating experience would suffer. So every ingredient that is on a label is there for a purpose, whether that’s stability or texture or shelf life, or process tolerance."
This statement underscores a fundamental truth in food science: ingredients are not arbitrary additions. They serve crucial functional roles that are essential for product integrity, palatability, and shelf stability. Removing these ingredients without careful consideration can lead to unintended consequences, such as a compromised taste profile, an altered texture, or a reduced shelf life, all of which can negatively impact consumer acceptance.
Bunte pointed to ingredients like titanium dioxide, datum, and monodisaccharide as examples of components that may appear intimidating to consumers due to their scientific names but play vital roles in food products. Replacing these ingredients with more "natural" alternatives that can replicate their specific functionalities is a significant undertaking. It requires extensive research and development, and crucially, the establishment of "reliable supply chains" for these new ingredients. The availability, consistency, and cost of these alternative ingredients are all critical factors that can influence the feasibility of reformulation.
While Bunte acknowledged that "fewer ingredients certainly can be a useful signal of simplicity," he cautioned that "ingredient count alone is a poor measure of how clean a food is." This reinforces the notion that the quality and nature of ingredients are more significant indicators of a product’s "cleanliness" than simply the number of items on the label. A product with a long list of recognizable, naturally derived ingredients might be perceived as cleaner by consumers than a product with a short list containing highly processed or synthetic components.
Beyond ingredient selection, maintaining consumer expectations regarding taste and texture is paramount. Bunte stressed that texture is particularly critical in clean label formulations. This is often the first sensory attribute that consumers notice and can be the most susceptible to degradation when ingredients are altered. A compromised texture can lead to immediate consumer dissatisfaction, even if other aspects of the product are improved.
The evolving landscape of consumer health consciousness, particularly with the rise of GLP-1 medications, adds another layer of complexity. Consumers on these medications are increasingly seeking nutrient-dense foods with minimal processing. This demand creates a dual challenge for food companies: they must not only formulate products that are clean label and nutritionally robust but also ensure they remain appealing in terms of taste and texture.
"When you think about these products that are super protein dense and fiber dense, they become really hard to formulate with," Bunte explained. "Because they can be gritty or chalky or dense. These are great examples where some of our clean label texture solutions can really deliver that creamy or indulgent experience in a much more smaller, nutrient-dense portion size." This illustrates how innovative texture solutions can bridge the gap between nutritional goals and desirable sensory experiences, allowing for the creation of nutrient-dense products that are also enjoyable to consume.
Finally, the perennial challenge of affordability cannot be overlooked. While consumers may desire cleaner ingredients, their purchasing decisions are often heavily influenced by price. Fortunately, Bunte offered a hopeful perspective, noting that reformulating for a cleaner label doesn’t automatically necessitate a higher price point. He provided an example of a yogurt manufacturer that successfully utilized a clean label texturizer. This innovation allowed them to reduce their reliance on expensive dairy fats, ultimately lowering the overall cost of the reformulated product.
"What’s really important is not just the ingredient cost, as it’s only part of the equation," Bunte concluded. "It’s really important to be laser focused really on cost and use." This sentiment highlights the need for a holistic approach to cost management, considering not only the direct cost of ingredients but also their impact on processing, waste, and overall product value. By strategically leveraging innovative ingredients and optimizing their application, companies can achieve their clean label objectives without compromising affordability.
The journey towards a truly "clean" food landscape is a dynamic and evolving one. As consumer understanding of food processing and ingredients continues to develop, and as the industry innovates to meet these demands, the definitions and expectations surrounding "clean label" and "ultra-processed" will undoubtedly continue to shift. For CPG brands, staying abreast of these changes, investing in research and development, and fostering transparency with consumers will be crucial for navigating this complex but ultimately rewarding path towards healthier and more desirable food options.
