Food labelling is widely recognised as a strategic tool for promoting healthy dietary choices. But the effectiveness of labels depends on consumers’ education and level of understanding, which determine how they interpret the information provided. According to Grunert et al (2022), understanding labels is not just a function of exposure to the label but is also dependent on the health literacy and cognitive ability of consumers, as well as their cultural norms and time constraints during shopping.

A meta-analysis by Packer et al (2021) affirmed that consumers most intuitively understand colour-coded systems, particularly traffic light labelling (TLL), among other labelling systems which provide immediate visual cues that require minimal cognitive processing. In contrast, Guideline Daily Amounts (GDAs) depend more on numerical data, and often present difficulties for consumers, especially those who have limited nutritional knowledge. Campos et al (2022) buttressed these facts in their analysis, noting that while GDAs may provide detailed information, they are less impactful due to the cognitive ability required to interpret them correctly.

Further, health literacy plays a central role in label comprehension. Silva et al (2024) argued that consumers who have lower levels of education or health literacy are less likely to accurately interpret or use food labels when making purchasing decisions. This assertion by the scholars is particularly relevant in socio-economically diverse communities like Middlesbrough, England, where educational and literacy disparities can impede realization of the expected impact from food labelling strategies.

Visual elements such as colours, icons, and symbols also enhance consumer engagement. However, their effectiveness depends on their presentation. Roberto et al (2023) agree that poor contrast of labels, tiny font sizes, or use of technical terminology can significantly hinder comprehension, particularly among older adults or visually impaired consumers. How or where labels are placed is also important. According to Ma et al (2022), front-of-pack labelling is more effective than back-of-pack placement because the former aligns with shoppers’ natural viewing path.

Similarly, Cowburn and Stockley (2023) emphasized that food labels are more effective when they are cognitively accessible (that is, easy to process quickly) and contextually relevant (that is, relatable to consumers’ everyday experiences). From a related perspective, van Herpen and Trijp (2023) suggested that stakeholders in the food labelling ecosystem should support designs that consider shoppers’ behaviour in real-life retail environments where distractions are frequent and quick decisions are the norm.

Jones and Richardson (2022) further explored the gap between recognition and understanding. Consumers often encounter labelled food products and may quickly notice health-focused labels, but only few people can accurately interpret the information or use it while making shopping decisions. Miller et al (2023) found that consumers may also overestimate the healthiness of a product based on a single favourable indicator (such as a green colour for fat), thus, disregarding other critical nutrients such as sugar or salt. Individual and cultural preferences also shape label interpretation. For example, a demographic of consumers may distrust government-endorsed labelling systems or even prioritise taste, price, or familiarity with a brand/product over health cues even when labels are visible and understandable (Kaur et al, 2023).

Summarily, how shoppers understand and interpret food labels are a result of determinant factors that include health literacy, cognitive effort, label format, and contextual relevance. Simplified and colour-coded labels (such as TLL and FOP) are more effective, but not universally sufficient. Therefore, to maximize effectiveness, food labelling strategies must be inclusive, clear, and tested under real-world shopping conditions to ensure accessibility for all consumer groups.