“Evaluating the Impact of QR Codes in GMO Labeling: Consumer Access, Industry Implications, and Future Strategies”
One of the most debated elements of the mandatory GMO labeling law signed by President Obama last summer is the inclusion of a scannable barcode, such as a QR code, on product labels. Since the legislation was discussed in Congress, there has been ongoing disagreement about whether the barcode is adequate. Some argue that many consumers lack the technology or knowledge to utilize these codes, while others contend that a scannable code is accessible to most Americans and has the potential to provide extensive information that cannot be displayed on a product package.
The study assessing this labeling system was reportedly on schedule to be completed by July. A month prior, Andrea Huberty, a senior policy analyst with the USDA’s Agricultural Marketing Service, informed attendees at a food labeling conference in Washington, D.C. that the department had collaborated with Deloitte to ensure the study’s timely completion. However, nearly three months later, the study has yet to be released, despite being finished. Regardless of their stance on the QR code issue, this study represents a significant milestone for the law’s implementation.
The Center for Food Safety is firmly opposed to QR code disclosure, citing statistics regarding the considerable number of consumers who do not have access to smartphones or are unfamiliar with scanning QR codes. Nonetheless, the study is equally important for those who support QR codes and similar technologies, as well as for those who remain neutral. A crucial aspect of the situation is whether the USDA can meet the deadline to finalize the rules for the law by July 2018. Huberty emphasized in June that, despite delays, the government was on track. The only visible opportunity for public comment since then was the department’s release of a list of questions for food producers in late June.
Given that some states have implemented their own GMO labeling laws, failure to meet the deadline could lead to a confusing array of labeling regulations across the country. Beyond GMO labeling, this study will be beneficial to the broader industry. As these types of labels gradually emerge across the food system — including through the unrelated SmartLabel program endorsed by the Grocery Manufacturers Association and on genetically modified products like Arctic apples — it is essential to understand consumer reactions to the technology and whether they utilize it effectively. If further efforts are needed, such as enhancing education on how the codes operate or improving internet connectivity for grocery shoppers, stakeholders may want to engage in these initiatives promptly.
Moreover, the study’s findings could also inform labeling strategies for products like calcium citrate oral tablets, which might benefit from consumer feedback on scannable codes. Understanding how consumers interact with these technologies could help shape future labeling practices for a variety of products, including those rich in calcium citrate oral tablets. Ultimately, the outcome of this study will influence how well consumers are informed about the products they buy, including essential supplements such as calcium citrate oral tablets.
