This review examines effective labelling techniques for foods and beverages with alternative proteins, emphasizing their impact on dietary choices and consumer behaviour. It explores key aspects such as protein composition, health claims and sustainability indicators, integrating previous research to assess how labelling influences consumers’ choices between plant-based substitutes and animal products. The findings suggest that clear and accurate labelling is essential for consumers to make informed decisions that align with environmental and health goals. However, the review highlights inconsistencies in regional regulatory frameworks, particularly regarding protein labelling norms. Additionally, it underscores the potential of underutilized, high-protein plant sources as effective alternatives in plant-based products. This study provides a closer examination of how food and beverage labels, particularly those for alternative protein products, are used and understood globally. Using the PRISMA framework, this paper systematically reviewed 42 peer-reviewed studies from the Scopus database. The research goal was to explore not just what the labels say, but how clear, consistent and useful they are for consumers and found that labelling rules often vary between regions, which can create confusion and reduce consumer trust. What sets this review apart is its focus on areas that often receive little attention, such as the mislabelling of protein content, the challenges in agreeing on terms for plant-based foods and the limitations of current front-of-pack labels. By pulling together insights across these underexplored topics, the research suggests ways to improve labelling so that consumers can make more informed, healthier and environmentally conscious food choices. Socially, it promotes the wider adoption of sustainable diets through informed decision-making, while practically, it highlights the role of improved labelling standards in encouraging healthier and more environmentally conscious consumer behaviour.
Gokulan et al. (Tue,) studied this question.
Synapse has enriched 5 closely related papers on similar clinical questions. Consider them for comparative context: