This State Is Banning ‘Sell By’ Labels to Help the ‘Environment’ and the ‘Planet’

California has recently implemented a significant legislative change regarding food labelling, banishing the “sell by” date on perishable goods. This new law, which took effect on July 1, aims to tackle the widespread issue of consumer confusion surrounding food freshness and to mitigate food waste, which is a significant environmental concern.

Under the new guidelines, established by the California Department of Food and Agriculture (CDFA), manufacturers are now permitted to use only a limited range of phrases on packaging. Items can be labelled as “best if used by” or “best if frozen by” to indicate their peak quality. Additionally, safety references have been condensed to “use by” or “use or freeze by.” Notably, the only exceptions to these rules are eggs and infant formula, which will maintain their current labelling practices.

The introduction of this law comes as a response to a growing movement to simplify the language surrounding food labelling. Research cited by the advocacy group Californians Against Waste indicates that in the United States, more than 50 distinct labels are actively used on packaged foods, leading to a notable degree of consumer uncertainty. Labels such as “expires on,” “freshest before,” and “please enjoy by” often leave shoppers guessing whether the products are still safe to consume.

Democratic Assembly member Jacqui Irwin, who sponsored Assembly Bill 660, highlighted the goal of the legislation by stating that clearer labelling standards can directly contribute to reducing food waste. Irwin noted that the challenge of determining the edibility of food has been a common dilemma for many consumers. She stated on the bill’s official page that by reforming these standards, they could enhance food safety and quality, while simultaneously saving money for shoppers and easing environmental strain.

The CDFA reports a staggering figure, estimating that Californians discard between 5 and 6 million tonnes of food annually. Nationally, it is believed that approximately 30 to 40% of the entire food supply in the United States never reaches consumers’ plates. The issue of food waste is not merely an economic problem; it poses significant implications for the environment, contributing to greenhouse gas emissions as decomposing food in landfills releases harmful gases.

The response to California’s reformed food labelling has caught the attention of other states, with several, including New York, Maryland, and Illinois, now considering similar legislation. This shift in policy at the state level could herald a broader movement towards standardised food labelling practices across the country.

Proponents of the new law argue that it has the potential to provide clarity for consumers in making purchasing decisions. They suggest that fewer terms on food packaging can help eliminate confusion, thereby reducing the likelihood of unnecessary food disposal. Enhanced consumer confidence in the stability and safety of their food products is a key goal of this legislative initiative.

However, the decision to eliminate “sell by” dates has not been without controversy. Critics of the law argue that such changes could lead to a lack of essential information for consumers, potentially jeopardising food safety. Their concerns centre around the need for clear guidance on the freshness of products, especially in the context of perishable foods that may have varying shelf lives.

As this legislative change unfolds in California, its ultimate impact on consumer behaviour, food safety, and environmental pollution remains to be seen. The successes or challenges experienced under Assembly Bill 660 may provide valuable lessons for other states contemplating similar reforms. A collective movement towards clearer food labelling could play a significant role in reducing food waste not only in California but across the entire United States.