Australia faces a significant food waste crisis, with households discarding perfectly edible food due to misunderstandings around date labels. Recent research from RMIT University has highlighted how confusion over 'best-before' and 'use-by' dates contributes to this issue, prompting calls for a comprehensive food labelling overhaul. Every year, Australians throw away 7.6 million tonnes of food, equivalent to 312 kilograms per person, with households responsible for 40% of it. This not only strains household budgets—costing the average family up to $2,500 annually—but also has profound environmental implications, as food waste accounts for a substantial portion of greenhouse gas emissions.
The problem stems from inconsistent and unclear labelling practices that fail to empower consumers to make informed decisions. While 'use-by' dates indicate the last day a product is safe to eat, 'best-before' dates signal peak quality, meaning the food remains safe beyond that point if stored properly and shows no signs of spoilage. Yet, many consumers treat both dates interchangeably, erring on the side of caution and discarding safe food prematurely.
RMIT University's Pioneering Study on Consumer Perceptions
At the forefront of this discussion is groundbreaking research conducted by RMIT University as part of the End Food Waste Cooperative Research Centre's (EFW CRC) Project 1.2.4, titled 'National Date Labelling and Storage Advice – Phase 1'. Led by Associate Professor Lukas Parker from RMIT's School of Media and Communication, the study involved in-depth interviews with 125 consumers across Australia, representing diverse demographics including age groups from 18 to 65+, household types, and regional variations from Queensland to Tasmania.
The methodology was qualitative and semi-structured, with participants recalling labels from memory without visual aids to capture real-world perceptions. Discussions covered five food categories: bakery, dairy and eggs, fruits and vegetables, packaged and processed foods, and meat and seafood. Complementing this were collective intelligence workshops with stakeholders from industry, government, and consumers to refine pilot designs for improved labelling.
Parker noted, "Consumers want clear, consistent and easy-to-read information. Date labels should be in a large font with contrasting colours so that they are easy to find and interpret." This RMIT-led effort underscores the university's commitment to addressing real-world problems through interdisciplinary research, blending marketing, design, and consumer behavior insights.
Decoding Use-By and Best-Before: Definitions and Misconceptions
Under the Australia New Zealand Food Standards Code, administered by Food Standards Australia New Zealand (FSANZ), date marking is mandatory for most packaged foods with a shelf life less than two years. 'Use-by' dates (full name: Use-By Date, abbreviated UBD) denote the final day for safe consumption or sale, primarily for perishable high-risk foods like meat, dairy, and seafood where bacterial growth poses health risks. Consuming or selling past this date is illegal due to potential foodborne illness.
In contrast, 'best-before' dates (Best-Before Date, BFD) indicate the end of the period when a food is at its optimal quality in terms of taste, texture, and appearance. Foods like biscuits, canned goods, or low-risk items remain safe after this date if unopened and stored correctly, as long as sensory checks (look, smell, taste) confirm no deterioration. However, the study found that 70-82% of consumers misunderstand these nuances, often equating best-before with safety expiry.
This confusion is exacerbated by interchangeable terms like 'packed on', 'display until', or 'frozen on', which vary by state regulations and retailer practices, leading to inconsistent consumer education.
Consumer Behaviors: Caution Over Sense
The RMIT interviews revealed two consumer archetypes: 'date followers' who strictly adhere to printed dates, discarding food on or near them, and 'sense users' who rely on smell, sight, and taste. Even among those intellectually grasping the difference, practical behavior skewed toward caution, with many admitting to binning best-before food 'just in case' to avoid illness.
- High-risk categories (dairy, meat): 90% followed dates closely, fearing bacteria like Salmonella or Listeria.
- Low-risk categories (fruits, bakery): Labels ignored more, with sensory checks preferred, but post-opening uncertainty common.
Young families wasted more due to child safety concerns, while older Australians trusted senses more. In humid climates, labels were deemed unreliable, prompting early disposal.
Vague Storage Advice Amplifies the Problem
Storage instructions like 'store in a cool, dry place' were universally criticized as unhelpful, especially in Australia's diverse climates. Consumers sought specifics: fridge temps (4°C), freezing guidelines (-18°C), post-opening durations ('use within 3 days'), and sealing tips.
The study highlighted that labels often peel off after opening, leaving no guidance, and lacked freezing advice, a key waste reducer. Recommendations include icons for fridge/freezer, climate-specific notes, and QR codes for detailed info (though consumers wary of marketing links).
Economic Burden and Environmental Toll
Household food waste equates to $2,500 lost annually per family, totaling $36.6 billion nationally when including supply chain losses. Environmentally, it generates methane in landfills, contributing 8% of Australia's GHG emissions—equivalent to all domestic aviation.
Clearer labels could save nearly 1 million tonnes by 2030, per EFWA estimates, aligning with Australia's National Food Waste Strategy to halve waste by 2030.
Regional and Demographic Variations
Climate plays a role: Queensland and NT residents found labels less reliable in heat/humidity, discarding sooner. Young parents prioritized safety for kids, while retirees used experience. Cultural groups varied, with some preferring production dates ('packed on').
Stakeholder Views from Collective Intelligence Workshops
Workshops with retailers, producers, policymakers revealed industry sees waste as consumer issue, preferring education over redesign due to costs passed to buyers. Consumers demanded consumer-centric changes; governments pushed standardization. Consensus: national framework needed, inspired by UK's voluntary 'use by' clarity campaign.
Path to Overhaul: RMIT's Recommendations
Parker proposes:
- Large, contrasting fonts for dates.
- Icons/symbols for storage (fridge, freezer).
- Specifics: 'Refrigerate at 4°C', 'Freeze by this date'.
- Production dates + buffer ('safe 3 days after opening').
- Sensory prompts: 'Check smell/look'.
- Climate-adapted advice, QR for details.
Phase 2 will test pilots with supermarkets.Full consumer report (PDF)
International Lessons for Australia
UK reduced waste 20% via clearer 'use by' labels. EU trials icons. US varies wildly (50+ terms), increasing waste. Australia could adopt hybrid: mandatory clarity, voluntary icons.
Government and Industry Responses
FSANZ clarifies but no overhaul yet. Funded by QLD, SA, NSW, Vic governments via CRC. EFWA CEO Tristan Butt urges industry action: "Time for industry to act." Phase 2 co-design with Coles, Woolworths planned.
Practical Tips for Consumers Amid Change
- Use senses for best-before food.
- Freeze before dates.
- Shop small/frequent.
- Check FSANZ app for advice.
RMIT's work empowers better choices.
Photo by Natalie Parham on Unsplash
Future Outlook: Towards Smarter Labelling
With Phase 2, potential 2030 national standards. RMIT's research positions Australian universities as leaders in sustainability, blending academia with policy for impact.
