Ultra-processed foods: getting ahead of a definition that will hit your recipes

From a fuzzy concept to an operational definition

NOVA sorts foods into four groups, the fourth — ultra-processed — covering industrial formulations that combine extracted substances (sugars, starches, protein isolates) with cosmetic additives (colours, flavours, emulsifiers). The criticism of this definition is its imprecision.

Regulators are therefore seeking measurable criteria based on the presence of certain ingredient families and process markers. An operational definition will make a product classifiable — and therefore targetable by policy.

The focus shifts to additives and processes

An emulsifier, flavour or colour added "for texture or appearance" becomes a signal of ultra-processing, regardless of the nutritional profile. The question is no longer only "how much sugar" but "which ingredients, with what function, and why".

This puts qualitative composition — ingredient families, additives, technological functions — back at the centre of a product's assessment.

School canteens and public procurement, the first testing ground

Without waiting for a final consensus, policies are already acting: school catering, public procurement and private certifications are starting to exclude ultra-processed products. A listing can therefore depend on a product's classification well before any general law.

What this means for your product data

Getting ahead means knowing, for every recipe, which ingredients count as a marker of ultra-processing and what function they serve — then simulating clean-label alternatives with their impact on cost, texture and compliance.

A PLM that structures each ingredient by family and technological function lets you instantly flag products exposed to a future UPF definition and drive the reformulation. crumble-ai turns this watch into data work, not a manual portfolio review.