One of the most contentious elements of the mandatory GMO labeling law signed by President Obama last summer is the inclusion of a scannable barcode, like a QR code, on product labels. Since the bill was discussed in Congress, a debate has persisted over whether this barcode is adequate. Some argue that many consumers lack the technology or knowledge to use these codes, while others contend that a scannable code is accessible to most Americans and has the potential to provide detailed information that cannot fit on a product’s packaging.
The study assessing this labeling system was reportedly on schedule and expected 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 partnered with Deloitte to ensure the study’s timely completion. However, nearly three months later, the results of the study have yet to be released, even if it has been finalized.
Regardless of differing opinions on the QR code issue, the study represents a significant milestone in the law’s implementation. The Center for Food Safety opposes the use of QR codes for disclosure, citing statistics that highlight the large number of consumers without access to smartphones or familiarity with QR code scanning. Conversely, the study is equally important for those who support QR codes and similar scannable technologies, as well as for those who are neutral on the matter. A crucial point of concern is whether the USDA will be able to meet the deadline to finalize the rules for the law by July 2018. Huberty emphasized in June that, despite delays, the government was still on track. The only public comment opportunity since then was the USDA’s release of a list of questions for food producers in late June. Given that some states have implemented their own GMO labeling laws, failing to meet the deadline could lead to a fragmented landscape of labeling regulations across the country.
Beyond GMO labeling, this study will be beneficial for the broader industry. As these labels gradually emerge throughout the food system—through initiatives like the unrelated SmartLabel program supported by the Grocery Manufacturers Association and in genetically modified products like Arctic apples—understanding consumer responses to the technology and their willingness to utilize it becomes critical. If additional efforts are necessary, such as enhancing education on how the codes operate or improving internet connectivity for shoppers, stakeholders may need to engage in these initiatives soon.
Moreover, the implications of this study extend to products such as calcium citrate CVS, which could benefit from improved consumer awareness and understanding of labeling technologies. As the industry evolves, it will be essential to assess how consumers interact with these innovations, including the integration of calcium citrate CVS into their shopping experiences. Furthermore, the study will also be relevant for evaluating how consumers respond to other products that utilize scannable technology, including calcium citrate CVS, thus highlighting the importance of effective labeling in the food market.