A new face of malnutrition
UNICEF’s latest report delivers an uncomfortable truth. For the first time, obesity has overtaken underweight as the most widespread form of malnutrition among school-age children and adolescents worldwide. One in ten is now classified as obese, equivalent to 188 million young people. In total, 391 million children are either overweight or obese, with the risks ranging from diabetes to cardiovascular disease later in life.
The figures show stark disparities. In Pacific island states such as Niue and the Cook Islands, more than a third of children are affected. In high-income countries, the numbers remain stubbornly high, with 27 percent of Chilean children, 21 percent of American children, and 16.7 percent of French children recorded as overweight or obese. What is clear is that this is no longer a marginal issue. Obesity has become the new normal for childhood malnutrition, reshaping the global health landscape.
An easy solution that is not a solution
Faced with this trend, policymakers have sought quick interventions that signal action. In France, one of the measures most often cited is Nutri-Score, the front-of-pack nutrition label that grades food from green “A” to red “E” according to nutrient content per 100 grams. Alongside soda taxes, Nutri-Score is frequently presented as evidence that Europe is taking obesity seriously.
Yet two decades into its existence, the data suggests that such labels have failed to halt rising obesity. Controlled studies indicate that labels can influence purchases at the margin, but the effect in real supermarkets is modest at best. A French pilot covering 900 products found only a 2.5 percent improvement in the nutritional quality of consumer baskets. That may be statistically measurable, but it is far from transformative. Meanwhile, childhood obesity in France remains a pressing problem.
The reason is simple. Labels are designed to inform, but information alone does not restructure the food environment. Families do not eat by algorithm. Choices are shaped by price, availability, marketing, and culture. A color code on packaging cannot change the economics of household diets, nor can it protect children from pervasive advertising that encourages overconsumption.
Industry hesitation and political limits
The cracks are becoming visible. Earlier this year, Nestlé announced it would remove Nutri-Score from its Swiss brands, citing low consumer uptake and a lack of political support. Other Swiss companies, including Migros and Emmi, had already taken the same step. At the same time, Geneva’s State Council decided against making Nutri-Score mandatory, arguing that such a requirement would overstep its legal powers.
These developments matter. Switzerland has often been viewed as a testing ground for nutrition policy, and the retreat of major companies there raises questions about Nutri-Score’s viability as a continental standard. If the largest food manufacturer in Europe and a key national government are moving away, the idea of imposing Nutri-Score across the European Union looks increasingly fragile.
There is also the broader credibility problem. If the label were genuinely delivering measurable health outcomes, neither industry nor governments would be abandoning it. Their reluctance is not simply political; it reflects the reality that Nutri-Score does not shift consumer behavior at the scale its designers promised.
The danger of distraction
The persistence of Nutri-Score in European debate highlights a deeper issue. Policymakers prefer interventions that are easy to communicate and simple to administer. A label on a packet is visible and immediate. It suggests progress without requiring structural reform. But as the UNICEF report makes clear, the rise in childhood obesity is not the result of poor individual judgement. It is driven by environments that nudge children toward cheap, energy-dense foods while marketing channels reach them with unprecedented intensity.
By focusing on labels, governments risk mistaking presentation for policy. Obesity continues to climb not because families lack information, but because healthier foods are often more expensive and less accessible, and because marketing saturates every medium from television to smartphones. Labels do not alter those conditions. They add another layer to packaging without touching the forces that shape diets.
What real action requires
If Europe is to respond to the scale of the crisis UNICEF describes, it must abandon the illusion that front-of-pack labels are a strategy in themselves. Nutrition policy must instead focus on structural change. That means regulating the marketing of unhealthy foods to children, ensuring schools are free from commercial promotion, and reforming subsidies so that nutritious products are not priced out of reach for low-income families. It means integrating food policy with climate and agricultural reform, rather than outsourcing the problem to a traffic-light scheme.
There are examples to draw from. Mexico recently banned the sale of high-sugar and high-salt foods in public schools, improving the food environment for 34 million children. Several American cities have restricted soda advertising on public transport. These measures do not rely on consumer interpretation of color codes; they directly reshape what is available and how it is promoted.
Europe has the means to act in the same way. But doing so requires confronting entrenched interests and moving beyond the comfort zone of superficial fixes.
A turning point
UNICEF’s report shows that obesity is no longer a side issue but the defining form of malnutrition for the twenty-first century. It is a problem that will shape health systems, productivity, and inequality for decades to come. Labels may reassure policymakers that something is being done, but they are no substitute for the difficult work of reforming food systems.
Nutri-Score might have been conceived in good faith, but its moment has clearly passed. It has not stemmed the rise in obesity, and even the companies that once embraced it are walking away. As fires scorch southern Europe and health statistics grow more alarming, the lesson is the same: cosmetic interventions are no match for systemic crises.
Children cannot be protected by stickers on a packet. They need environments that make healthy choices possible, affordable, and normal. If Europe is serious about tackling obesity, it must stop clinging to the false comfort of Nutri-Score and start addressing the structural realities that UNICEF has placed so starkly before us.
