Australia's Health Star Rating System

History and development of the Health Star Rating System

The 2011 Labelling Logic Review of Food Labelling Law and Policy, commissioned by the Australian, state and territory and New Zealand governments, identified the need for a front-of-pack nutrition labelling scheme, within the framework of a comprehensive nutrition policy.¹ Australian, state and territory and New Zealand governments agreed to support this recommendation, declaring that a front-of-pack labelling system should provide simple, consistent nutrition information to enable consumers to make healthier food choices.² The objective was for the system to be readily understandable across socio-economic groups, culturally and linguistically diverse groups, and for consumers with low literacy and numeracy.

The Health Star Rating system was developed by the Australian, State and Territory governments, in conjunction with industry, and public health and consumer groups. The system was implemented by the food industry on a voluntary basis from June 2014. At the time of endorsement, the group of ministers from the Australian, New Zealand and State and Territory governments who oversee food regulation (known now as the Food Ministers’ Meeting) said a mandatory approach would be required if voluntary uptake was not “consistent and widespread ”.³

In December 2019, the Food Ministers’ Meeting responded to a formal five-year review into the Health Star Rating System,⁴ and agreed to continue the system, to set uptake targets and to make some changes to the HSR system. These changes included minor updates to the underlying algorithm, application of automatic ratings to some additional categories (5 star ratings for all fresh fruit and vegetables), some display changes and minor changes to governance and supporting structures.⁵ However, there are key public health and consumer concerns still outstanding, including with the system’s voluntary nature, the system’s governance, a nutrient profiling model that allows products high in unhealthy fats, added sugars, and/or sodium, and those that are ultra processed to score highly, and the ease of visibility and interpretation of the label (see proposed changes to the Health Star Rating).

Monitoring and evaluation of the Health Star Rating System

Uptake by industry

Uptake of the voluntary Health Star Rating system has been the subject of official government monitoring in Australia and New Zealand, as well as independent cross-sectional examination of the food supply.

In 2024, government and independent monitoring estimated only around a third of eligible products in Australian supermarkets displayed a Health Star Rating.⁹¹⁰¹¹ This was substantially below the government’s target of 60% of products by November 2024, and indicates that industry is unlikely to reach the final target of 70% of products by November 2025. Industry uptake has also not had any significant increase since 2019, with the removal of now ineligible formats (i.e., energy only icon) in late 2020.¹²

Several analyses indicate that Health Star Ratings are inconsistently applied to food products. A 2017 study showed that uptake differed by product categories, with the highest uptake of Health Star Ratings in convenience foods, cereals, and fruit and vegetable products.¹³ Furthermore, uptake of Health Star Ratings has been shown to be higher in categories where products scored a higher average Health Star Rating, suggesting that the label is being used predominantly where it confers marketing benefit to industry.¹⁴ A 2024 analysis found only a quarter of products with a rating of 3 stars and below displayed the label, in comparison to over half of products with a rating of 3.5 and above, with the 5-star rating the most commonly used.⁹ This is despite a recommendation that food manufacturers apply the system consistently across a product range and/or category.⁷ Public health advocates argue that the voluntary system limits consumers’ ability to use the system effectively, due to this selective and limited application.¹⁵

Trust, awareness and use by consumers

Research has found that in general, consumers value the Health Star Rating as a simple, easy to understand tool that helps to quickly compare healthiness across products.¹⁶¹⁷¹⁸ There is also widespread public support for food companies to display the Health Star Rating on all products.¹⁹²⁰²¹ However, consumers report distrust of the Health Star Rating, despite indicating the scheme is important.²² FSANZ has suggested that this may be due to the belief that the scheme is not sufficiently regulated by government.²² Research has also found consumers report scepticism on how star ratings are calculated, due to perceived lack of transparency around the criteria or due to product rating anomalies,¹⁶ as well as distrust of industry involvement or industry motivations of the Health Star Rating.²¹

Results of FSANZ’s latest annual consumer insights survey (conducted in 2023, including 2000 adult participants from Australia and New Zealand) indicated that the Health Star Rating was trusted by 55% of respondents.²² Among other aspects of nutrition labelling (such as nutrition/ingredient content claims), the Health Star Rating was rated as one of the most important aspects of food labelling, but also the least trusted. Surveys by New Zealand Food Safety, undertaken in December 2023, found 44% of the 1600 New Zealand adult respondents use the Health Star Rating most or every time when purchasing a packaged food or drink for the first time. 22% of participants had complete trust in the Health Star Rating, with 58% responding that they somewhat trusted it, 14% having no trust, and 6% unsure if they trusted it.²³

Reformulation

Nutrition labelling can lead to improvements in population diets by prompting food manufacturers to reformulate their products to reduce levels of unhealthy nutrients.

For example, one study found industry reformulation of foods in New Zealand in response to the Health Star Rating led to healthier household food purchases.²⁴ Another New Zealand study found that implementation of the Health Star Rating system was leading food manufacturers to reformulate some products to make them healthier. The study found that most products displaying Health Star Ratings in New Zealand had been reformulated to some extent and that ratings were mostly displayed on products such as cereals, breakfast drinks, convenience foods and sauces and spreads.²⁵

In Australia, a similar analysis found that the average energy density of food products carrying Health Star Ratings was lower than before the labelling system was introduced.²⁶ A 2019 study in Australia also suggested the Health Star Rating had stimulated healthier product reformulation in children’s packaged foods.²⁷ Modelled estimates also support that the product reformulation prompted by voluntary Health Star Rating would be cost-effective, with considerably greater benefits under a mandatory implementation of the system.²⁶

Consumer purchases

There is evidence that the Health Star Rating is associated with healthier consumer choices and purchases.²⁸ For example, a large-scale 2024 analysis of Australian household purchases before and after the introduction of the Health Star Rating indicated that as more packaged foods adopted the Health Star Rating in Australia, household purchases of packaged foods became heathier.²⁸ The study concluded that widespread adoption of the Health Star Rating would likely be beneficial for population health. Small-scale randomised controlled trials in 2017 did not find substantial evidence that the Health Star Rating resulted in healthier food purchases, however their impact may be limited as such interventions occurred in the context of low industry uptake of HSR.²⁹³⁰

Content for this page was updated by Jasmine Chan and Gary Sacks at GLOBE, Institute for Health Transformation, Deakin University and reviewed by Damian Maganja at The George Institute for Global Health. For more information about the approach to content on the site please see About | Obesity Evidence Hub.