The Calorie Conundrum
For years, the simple calorie count has been the king of menu information. In India, the Food Safety and Standards Authority of India (FSSAI) mandated in 2022 that restaurant chains and large food establishments must display the calorific value of their
dishes. This rule applies to establishments with a central license or ten or more locations, covering everything from quick-service restaurants to online food aggregators. The goal was straightforward: provide transparent information to help consumers make healthier choices. The logic seemed sound — if people knew a dish was high in calories, they might opt for a lighter alternative. However, the real-world impact has been less clear-cut, with studies showing that calorie labels alone often have only a modest effect on consumer behaviour. Recent analysis suggests that while labels may lead to a small reduction in calories selected, it might not be the game-changer public health advocates had hoped for.
Enter 'Exercise Labels'
One of the most debated alternatives is the Physical Activity Calorie Equivalent (PACE) label. Instead of just a number, a PACE label tells you how much physical activity is needed to burn the calories in a food item. For example, a slice of cake might come with a small icon indicating it requires “90 minutes of walking” to expend its energy. Proponents argue this provides a more relatable and tangible context than an abstract calorie figure. Some early research suggested PACE labels could help people reduce their calorie consumption by up to 200 calories per day. However, the science is far from settled. More recent, larger-scale studies conducted in real-world settings like workplace cafeterias have found no significant evidence that PACE labels actually change what people purchase. Critics also raise concerns that such labels could foster an unhealthy relationship with food and exercise, framing eating as something that must be “paid for” with physical activity.
From Your Plate to the Planet
The conversation is also expanding beyond personal health to planetary health. With food systems accounting for up to a third of global greenhouse gas emissions, a new wave of research is focused on climate or “eco-labels”. These labels indicate the environmental impact of a dish, often using a simple traffic-light system (red for high impact, green for low) or a letter grade. A recent study published in mid-2026 found that diners presented with menus featuring climate labels, particularly warning labels for high-impact items, consistently chose meals with a lower carbon footprint. Interestingly, these choices also tended to be healthier, as environmentally sustainable foods are often less processed and more plant-based. Research shows that a majority of consumers want to make more sustainable choices, and eco-labels could be a simple, low-cost way to empower them.
The Search for the Perfect Label
The challenge is finding a solution that is both effective and practical. For consumers, the risk is information overload. A menu cluttered with calories, exercise equivalents, climate grades, and allergen warnings could become more confusing than helpful. A 2025 study on Indian consumers noted that while awareness of labels is growing, engagement often doesn't go beyond price and expiry dates, and many find current labels confusing. For restaurants, implementing complex new labeling systems across a varied and rotating menu presents significant logistical and financial hurdles. The FSSAI itself continues to refine its own rules, with amendments in 2026 tweaking requirements for non-retail containers and specific warnings, set to take effect in 2027. This evolving landscape shows that regulators are grappling with the same question as researchers: what information is most crucial?
