1 / 34

Background

Background. Unilever undertook a Foresight initiative in 2000 to decide future direction Three main thrusts were highlighted : enjoyment; vitality and quality/convenience Unilever chose Vitality as consumer showed key interest health. Other thrusts could also be included under Vitality.

inge
Download Presentation

Background

An Image/Link below is provided (as is) to download presentation Download Policy: Content on the Website is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use and may not be sold / licensed / shared on other websites without getting consent from its author. Content is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use only. Download presentation by click this link. While downloading, if for some reason you are not able to download a presentation, the publisher may have deleted the file from their server. During download, if you can't get a presentation, the file might be deleted by the publisher.

E N D

Presentation Transcript

  1. Background • Unilever undertook a Foresight initiative in 2000 to decide future direction • Three main thrusts were highlighted : enjoyment; vitality and quality/convenience • Unilever chose Vitality as consumer showed key interest health. Other thrusts could also be included under Vitality. • In 2002 Unilever set up an Obesity task force to make recommendations to the business.

  2. Obesity grabs the headlines

  3. Vitality is about: • Making the healthy choice the easy choice • Providing solutions for everyday life • Education – starting internally • Reviewing our own portfolio so that Unilever can be credible in the external debate. • Providing clear information about our products

  4. Dilemma No 1 • Health variant or product reformulation?

  5. Dilemma No 2 • We didn’t know what was in our products!

  6. Nutrition Enhancement Programme • There were limited schemes available • Scheme needed to be global and scientifically based • Found that schemes were not easy to develop and required much testing • Had option to develop benchmarks for each category or a generic set with some exceptions.

  7. Dilemma No 3 • We had the theory but how do we put this into practice?

  8. Progress on NutritionEnhancement Programme In 2005 and 2006, we eliminated 30,000 tons of trans-fats, 7,000 tons of saturated fats, 37,000 tons of fat3,000 tons of sodium and17,500 tons of sugars from our portfolio

  9. Dilemma No 4 • If/how to apply to consumer communication ?

  10. Proliferation of health logos…. KeyholesystemSweden Pick the tick Australia/New Zealand PepsiCo United States of America Albert Heijn The Netherlands Healthier ChoiceSingapore GDA McDonald’s … is confusing consumers GDA Tesco Health Robot South Africa Multiple Traffic Light United Kingdom Sainsbury Traffic Light United Kingdom Sensible Solution Kraft

  11. Front-of-pack labelling • International health and consumer organisations are in favour of clear and simple nutrition information. • Quantitative consumer research indicates that: • Consumers value nutrition front-of-pack (FOP) labelling information • FOP logos affect perception and usage intention positively • A single FOP logo could work across countries

  12. The Choices qualifying criteria Original criteria Peer reviewed method [Eur J Clin Nutr 2007; 61:461-71] Based on set of 20 (inter-)national dietary guidelines Scientific Committee The Netherlands (6 members) Scientific Committee Belgium (6 members) Thorough review Choices independent criteria

  13. Choices in action • “Ik Kies Bewust” The Netherlands • First country with Choices implemented • Joint industry initiative • Participation by retail, trade and catering • Endorsement by government, consumer organisations and key opinion formers • Within 1 year: • 65 manufacturers, retailers and catering organisations member • around 1500 products, from 81 different brands, allowed to carry the stamp

  14. Communication materials

  15. The Choices Programme Simple, Science-based & International • Worldwide programme • Involving all stakeholders • Initiated by food industry • Supported by nutritional scientists, governments, NGOs • Adopted by retail and food service • A single front-of-pack stamp • Independent qualifying criteria • Stamp supported by harmonised communication • Open initiative: multinational & SME

  16. International governance structure Choices International Board International Scientific Committee National Board Choices The Netherlands National Board Choices Belgium National Board Choices Poland* National Board Choices … * Currently being set up

  17. Dynamic criteria • Evaluation every 2 years to keep aligned with latest scientific insights • Move qualifying criteria even more towards dietary recommendations • Monitoring effects on consumer and producer behaviour • Transition period for implementation • Sharing expertise and experience among partners and with relevant (N)GOs and scientists International Scientific Committee Chairman: Prof. Jaap Seidell 10 Eminent food & nutrition scientists from all regions

  18. Choices drives results June vs Jan. 13% spending increase! % of people buying Choices products Euros spent per buyer

  19. Marketing and Advertising to Children

  20. Marketing Principles • Food and beverage advertisements should not encourage or condone excess consumption and portion sizes. • In advertisements representing meals, the foods portrayed should be shown in the context of balanced diet. • Food and beverage advertisements should not undermine the promotion of healthy, balanced diets and active lifestyle. • Food product advertisements should not undermine the role of parents and other appropriate adult role models in providing valuable dietary guidance. • These have recently been revised with a commitment not to directly market children under 6. • Also committed only market those foods that meet our nutrition enhancement programme between 6 to 12.

  21. Dilemma No 5 • Collaboration when FOP labelling policy debate rages on?

  22. Current Situation Healthy Food Code of Practice Nutrient Profile FoP 2 Different FSA Nutrient Profiles Advertising Nutrition - one of which is under review To Children Labelling - Limited food categories Not currently covered by Nutrient Profiles, Nutrition Reformulation but rules and targets in place Claims This results in : - Inconsistency in overall policy approach (looks dis - jointed) - A debate focussed on contentious issues and not overall benefits - Low levels in trust and poor levels of consensus - Minimal input of industry expertise - A complex range of targets/assessments for industry to deal with

  23. Conclusion • Food industry like Unilever has a role to play in engaging with society at all levels to improve diet and public health. • We can provide clear nutrition information and education about our products. • We can improve the nutrition composition for many of our products as well as innovating new products. • We can engage people at work. • But we need a constructive and co-operative framework in order to find correct solutions. “Health is everyone’s business” Prof. Geoffrey Rose

  24. Thank you www.unilever.com

More Related