Survey on the implementation of labeling requirements in companies

Introduction

Labeling requirements have long been part of everyday business for food manufacturers—and become particularly challenging when products are marketed internationally. Different regulations, languages, layout specifications, and interpretations mean that food labeling often cannot be done “on the side,” but requires structured processes, a great deal of coordination, and the involvement of several departments.

IMERO regularly hosts webinars on international labeling. In two webinars, we asked 2025 participants—often quality managers from food companies—how they implement labeling requirements in their companies in practice and where the biggest hurdles lie. The results provide some interesting insights:

---

Survey results and classification

1) “Internationally compliant labeling is for our company...”

Responses:

• No problem: 2%

• Rather easy: 18%

• Rather difficult: 35%

• Difficult: 25%

• Very difficult: 20%

Before talking about tools, service providers, or AI, it is worth taking a look at the general feeling within the company: How difficult is it to reliably put international requirements into practice—including all mandatory food information?

The results clearly show that around 80% of respondents find international labeling rather difficult to very difficult. And this doesn't just affect “the others” – it affects companies of all sizes, just for different reasons:

• Large companies often face a wave of complexity: many product variants, many target countries, different languages, and frequent adjustments. Even with professional teams, food labeling quickly becomes a coordination project.

• Smaller companies often have fewer resources: no large legal department, little scope for multi-stage review processes, and often a lack of international experience.

• Medium-sized companies often find themselves in between: enough export activity to feel the complexity, but not always enough capacity to handle everything internally.

In short: for most companies, international labeling requirements are not a one-time task that can be checked off a list, but rather an ongoing process that requires structure, up-to-date information, and careful handling.

---

2) “Which external service providers do you use for internationally compliant labeling?”

Answers:

• Laboratories: 33%

• Lawyers: 9%

• Translators: 2%

• Importers: 31%

• Associations: 11%

• Expert network: 4%

• Exclusively internal expertise: 11%

When requirements become complex, many companies seek support—and for good reason. Depending on the market and product category, the information and tests required can vary greatly.

The “bouquet” of external helpers is striking. This sends a strong signal: in practice, international labeling is rarely handled by a single source—instead, information, assessments, and work steps are purchased from a variety of sources.

This has several effects:

• Time expenditure: Many participants mean many loops. It can take weeks before the importer provides the information, the translation is finalized, and the content is finally checked.

• Costs: Every interface costs money – not only in terms of invoices, but also internally: coordination, queries, versions, misunderstandings.

• Prone to errors: The more handovers there are, the more likely it is that something will slip through – especially with mandatory food information, where details such as order, wording, or quantities can be crucial.

---

3) “How do you stay informed about the current legal situation?”

Answers:

• Newsletters: 36%

• Events: 15%

• Expert networks: 13%

• Other sources: 11%

• Internet research: 8%

• External service providers: 8%

• Comparison labels/references: 6%

• AI: 4%

Even the best processes are of little use if the information base is unreliable. Precisely because requirements can change, the crucial question is: Where does knowledge about current requirements come from—and how is it maintained on a daily basis?

Here, too, it is clear that companies rely on many sources, some of which are parallel. Newsletters are at the forefront – understandable, because they are low-threshold and provide regular information. At the same time, this diversity indicates that there is rarely a single reliable source that covers all markets.

The typical result:

• Information is collected,

• interpreted internally,

• and then translated into texts, layouts, and approvals.

And this is precisely where pressure often arises in day-to-day business: when several countries, several product lines, and several stakeholders come together, the “current legal situation” quickly becomes a puzzle—with many pieces and no clear overall picture.

The low proportion of AI (4%) in this question is also noteworthy. This does not mean that AI plays no role—rather, that it is still rarely seen as the primary source for legal updates today. Many teams seem to view AI more as a support tool for specific tasks (e.g., research) than as a central authority for assessing labeling requirements. However, by combining AI and experts, IMERO can bridge this gap: specialized AI takes care of the manual work, while experts review the results.

---

Conclusion and creative finale

If international labeling were an orchestra, then many companies would have a large number of instruments playing at the same time: laboratory, importer, association, newsletter, internal checks, research—and somewhere in between, the label is created. The surveys from 2025 clearly show that For most, the implementation of international labeling requirements is not a “standard process,” but rather a continuous interplay of information gathering, coordination, and quality assurance.

This is exactly where modern approaches come in: structuring processes so that teams spend less time dealing with version chaos, email loops, and duplication of work – and can invest more time in product quality, market entry, and clean processes. IMERO combines AI-supported workflows with technical expertise, for example for structured label checking, assisted label translation, and systematic work on mandatory food information – as building blocks to make international food labeling more efficient to manage.

Ultimately, it's not about getting labeling done “somehow.” It's about organizing it in a way that makes it scalable: from the first export inquiry to the hundredth label.