The relationship between voluntary product (re) formulation commitments and changes in the nutritional quality of products offered by the top packaged food and beverage companies in Canada from 2013 to 2017

Vergeer, Laura; Ahmed, Mavra; Vanderlee, Lana; Mulligan, Christine; Weippert, Madyson; Franco-Arellano, Beatriz; Dickinson, Kacie; Bernstein, Jodi T.; Labonté, Marie-Ève; L’Abbé, Mary R.

doi:10.1186/s12889-022-12683-2

Table 1 The number of products offered by top packaged food and beverage companies in Canada in 2013 and 2017

From: The relationship between voluntary product (re) formulation commitments and changes in the nutritional quality of products offered by the top packaged food and beverage companies in Canada from 2013 to 2017

Company	Total products (n)^a		Matched products^b,c		Products discontinued or sold to other companies^d		New or acquired products^e
Company	2013	2017	n	%	n	%	n	%
OVERALL	6490	8277	4074	49.2	2416	37.2	4203	50.8
A. Lassonde	55	77	35	45.5	20	36.4	42	54.5
Agropur	99	123	53	43.1	46	46.5	70	56.9
Campbell Soup	197	222	116	52.3	81	41.1	106	47.7
Canada Bread	101	96	48	50.0	58	57.4	42	43.8
Canada Dry Mott’s	50	64	40	62.5	10	20.0	24	37.5
Coca-Cola	83	138	68	49.3	14	16.9	70	50.7
Danone	63	132	37	28.0	26	41.3	95	72.0
General Mills	300	382	194	50.8	106	35.3	188	49.2
George Weston	104	169	65	38.5	39	37.5	104	61.5
Kellogg	129	138	84	60.9	45	34.9	54	39.1
Kraft Heinz^f	612	460	332	72.2	240	39.2	168	36.5
Loblaw	2260	3099	1479	47.7	781	34.6	1620	52.3
Maple Leaf Foods	178	158	90	57.0	88	49.4	68	43.0
Mondelēz	45	227	68	30.0	17	37.8	119	52.4
Nestlé	277	313	158	50.5	120	43.3	155	49.5
Ocean Spray	32	38	25	65.8	7	21.9	13	34.2
Parmalat	72	120	41	34.2	31	43.1	79	65.8
PepsiCo	267	340	199	58.5	68	25.5	141	41.5
Saputo	78	95	36	37.9	37	47.4	65	68.4
Sobeys	1248	1633	754	46.2	494	39.6	879	53.8
Sun-Rype	40	36	19	52.8	21	52.5	17	47.2
Unilever	200	217	133	61.3	67	33.5	84	38.7

^aData from a subset of FLIP 2017 database that includes products offered by the 22 top packaged food and beverage companies in Canada (as of 2016). ^bRefers to products that were matched between the FLIP 2013 and 2017 datasets (based on barcode, product name, brand, company, Nutrition Facts table, ingredients list, product packaging); products may or may not have been reformulated. ^cThe percentage of products in FLIP 2017 that were matched to FLIP 2013. ^dThe number and percentage of products offered in 2013 but not 2017, such as due to discontinuation or acquisition of the product by another company; alternatively, products may have not been captured in FLIP 2017 despite being offered by one of the sampled companies at the time of data collection. ^eThe number and percentage of products in 2017 but not 2013, such as due to the introduction of new products or acquisition of products from another company; alternatively, products may have not been captured in FLIP 2013 despite being offered by one of the sampled companies at the time of data collection. ^fIn 2013, Kraft Foods and Heinz were two separate companies prior to merging in 2015 and forming The Kraft Heinz Company. However, to enable examination of changes in the nutritional quality of the company’s products over time – and because Kraft Heinz was assessed as one company using the FCR scoring tool – Kraft and Heinz were treated as a single company in 2013, as was done in similar research conducted on the Australian market [24]

Back to article page

ISSN: 1471-2458

Contact us

Submission enquiries: bmcpublichealth@biomedcentral.com
General enquiries: ORSupport@springernature.com

BMC Public Health

Contact us