This review includes the situation of nutrition labelling and claims in six countries in South-East Asia: Brunei, Indonesia, Malaysia, Philippines, Singapore and Thailand. With the exception of Malaysia, there is no mandatory nutrition labelling requirements for foods in these countries except for special categories of foods and when nutritional claims are made for fortified or enriched foods. Nevertheless, several food manufacturers, especially multinationals, do voluntarily label the nutritional content of a number of food products. There is, therefore, increasing interest among authorities in countries in the region to start formulating regulations for nutrition labelling for a wider variety of foods. Malaysia has proposed new regulations to make it mandatory to label a number of foodstuffs with the four core nutrients, protein, carbohydrate, fat and energy. Other countries have preferred to start with voluntary labelling by the manufacturers, but have spelt out the requirements for this voluntary labelling. The format and requirements for nutrition labelling differ widely for countries in the region. Some countries, such as Malaysia, closely follow the Codex guidelines on nutrition labelling in terms of format, components to be included and mode of expression. Other countries, such as the Philippines and Thailand, have drafted nutrition labelling regulations very similar to those of the Nutrition Labeling and Education Act (NLEA) of the United States. Nutrition and health claims are also not specifically permitted under food regulations that were enacted before 1998. However, various food products on the market have been carrying a variety of nutrition and health claims. There is concern that without proper regulations, the food industry may not be certain as to what claims can be made. Excessive and misleading claims made by irresponsible manufacturers would only serve to confuse and mislead the consumer. In recent years, there has been efforts in countries in the region to enact regulations on nutrition claims. Recently enacted regulations or amendments to existing regulations of almost all the countries reviewed have included provisions for nutrition claims. Malaysia is in the process of gazetting regulations to clearly stipulate the permitted nutrition claims and the conditions required to make these claims along the guidelines of Codex Alimentarius Commission. Only two countries in the region permit health claims to be made - Indonesia and Philippines. Other countries in the region are following developments in Codex and examining the need for allowing these claims. There are more differences than similarities in the regulations on nutrition labelling and claims among countries in the South-East Asian region as no previous efforts have been made to address these. Hopefully, through this first regional meeting, countries can initiate closer interaction, with a view to working towards greater harmonization of nutrition labelling and health claims in the region.
The 2nd International Conference on East-West Perspective on Functional Foods held in Kuala Lumpur, Malaysia, on November, 2007, discussed the current work on some traditional Asian foods and new technologies that offer both challenges and opportunities for functional foods. The highlight of the conference was on the current regulatory status of nutrition and health claims related to functional foods and the experiences in some countries on the substantiation of claims. Attention was also given to strategies for effective communication of functional foods to consumers. The conference concluded with recommendations to strengthen R and D efforts and harmonization of protocols and methodologies on functional foods within the region.
In the globalised world of the 21st century, issues of food and nutrition labelling are of pre-eminent importance. Several international bodies, including the World Health Organisation and World Trade Organisation, are encouraging countries to harmonise their food and nutrition regulations with international standards, guidelines and recommendations such as those for Codex Alimentarius. Through harmonisation, these organisations envisage fewer barriers to trade and freer movement of food products between countries, which would open doors to new markets and opportunities for the food industry. In turn, increased food trade would enhance economic development and allow consumers a greater choice of products. Inevitably, however, embracing harmonisation brings along cost implications and challenges that have to be overcome. Moreover, the harmonisation process is complex and sporadic in light of the tasks that countries have to undertake; for example, updating legislation, strengthening administrative capabilities and establishing analytical laboratories. This review discusses the legislation and regulations that govern food and nutrition labelling in Southeast Asia, and highlights the discrepancies that exist in this regard, their origin and consequences. It also gives an account of the current status of harmonising labelling of pre-packaged foodstuffs in the region and explains the subsequent benefits, challenges and implications for governments, the food industry and consumers.
Mandatory nutrition labelling, introduced in Malaysia in 2003, received a "medium implementation" rating from public health experts when previously benchmarked against international best practices by our group. The rating prompted this qualitative case study to explore barriers and facilitators during the policy process. Methods incorporated semi-structured interviews supplemented with cited documents and historical mapping of local and international directions up to 2017. Case participants held senior positions in the Federal government (n = 6), food industry (n = 3) and civil society representations (n = 3). Historical mapping revealed that international directions stimulated policy processes in Malaysia but policy inertia caused implementation gaps. Barriers hindering policy processes included lack of resources, governance complexity, lack of monitoring, technical challenges, policy characteristics linked to costing, lack of sustained efforts in policy advocacy, implementer characteristics and/or industry resistance, including corporate political activities (e.g., lobbying, policy substitution). Facilitators to the policy processes were resource maximization, leadership, stakeholder partnerships or support, policy windows and industry engagement or support. Progressing policy implementation required stronger leadership, resources, inter-ministerial coordination, advocacy partnerships and an accountability monitoring system. This study provides insights for national and global policy entrepreneurs when formulating strategies towards fostering healthy food environments.