1. Executive Summary
This rapid review summarises international evidence on how out of home (OOH) food businesses have responded to mandatory and voluntary menu calorie labelling policies. The review focuses on business compliance, operational and implementation impacts, and changes in the calorie content of menu items. Evidence was identified from peer-reviewed literature published between 2015 and 2025, supplemented by targeted grey literature.
The evidence suggests that mandatory calorie labelling schemes achieve substantially higher levels of compliance than voluntary approaches. In jurisdictions with mandatory requirements, many large chain businesses display calorie or energy information at the point of choice, although compliance is not uniform. By contrast, voluntary provision is consistently low, particularly among smaller and independent businesses. The clearest implementation gap is in digital ordering environments. Several studies found lower and less consistent compliance on online menus and third-party delivery platforms than on in-store menus, even where legislation formally applied to online ordering.
Businesses reported a range of implementation challenges. These included nutritional analysis, recipe standardisation, staff training, menu redesign, maintaining accurate information as menus changed, and navigating requirements across physical and digital platforms. These are recurring demands rather than one-off implementation costs. Enforcement capacity also appears important, with evidence suggesting that local authorities may face resource constraints and competing regulatory priorities.
Evidence on changes in the calorie content of menu items is mixed. Some studies reported modest reductions, particularly among newly introduced items or in calories purchased per transaction. Others reported no change or small increases. Where reductions occurred, they were generally small and inconsistent, and there was limited evidence of systematic reformulation of established menu items. The current evidence base focuses mainly on calorie disclosure, with limited empirical evidence on whether broader nutrient information, such as salt, sugar or saturated fat, would produce different business responses.
For Scotland, the evidence suggests that mandatory approaches are more likely than voluntary schemes to achieve widespread provision of calorie information. However, effective implementation would require clear statutory guidance, technical support for businesses, defined responsibilities across online and offline settings, and sufficient enforcement capacity. Menu calorie labelling may improve transparency, but on its own is unlikely to drive large reductions in the energy content of OOH foods.
2. Background
Foods available out of home (OOH) are often more energy-dense and higher in nutrients of public health concern, including saturated fat, free sugars and sodium. Regular consumption of foods high in energy, fat and sugar can contribute to excess energy intake, and therefore increase the risk of overweight and obesity. Improving the nutritional transparency of the foods available OOH has therefore been identified as a potential policy lever to encourage businesses to reduce the energy content (calories) of foods available OOH through reformulation of recipes and reducing portion size, leading to a reduction in energy purchased and consumed, and potentially reducing the risk of diet-related non-communicable diseases such as cardiovascular disease and type 2 diabetes. Several countries have introduced legislation requiring OOH food businesses to provide energy information (calories/kilojoules) at the point of choice (i.e., visible where food is selected, rather than having to be requested), including the United States, Canada, Saudi Arabia, Australia, Ireland and England (APPENDIX A). In some jurisdictions, additional nutrient information (such as sugar, salt, or fat) is required to be available on request rather than displayed at the point of choice, whereas others mandate that calorie information is directly presented on menus. While these policies share a common aim, they vary in coverage of businesses, presentation requirements, and enforcement approaches. Alongside mandatory approaches, some jurisdictions have implemented voluntary schemes. Mandatory schemes also differ in what must be displayed at the point of choice versus what must be available in other ways. Policies further differ in whether online ordering and delivery environments are explicitly included within the scope of legislation.
The OOH food environment comprises outlets such as restaurants providing sit-in meals, take-aways, quick service restaurants, pubs and bars, cafés and coffee shops, bakery and sandwich shops, convenience stores selling food on the go and other locations where foods can be purchased and consumed OOH including leisure, workplace, travel, vending and garages. In the United Kingdom, among individuals who consume OOH foods, these eating occasions account for around 23% of total daily energy intake.
Following a recommendation by Food Standards Scotland in 2019, and publication of the OOH action plan, the Scottish Government consulted on proposals for mandatory calorie labelling in 2022. Further progress was paused in 2023, following consultation analysis, which found general opposition to mandatory calorie labelling largely due to concerns that this might negatively impact those with an eating disorder. In 2024, Food Standards Scotland (FSS) recommended exploring alternative approaches to nutrition information provision OOH, including options that extend beyond calorie information and models where information is made available on request.
As Scotland considers future options, it is important to understand how similar policies have been implemented elsewhere, particularly in relation to business responses and practical implementation. Across jurisdictions, menu calorie labelling policies differ in how the implementation and enforcement responsibilities are arranged. These differences are important when interpreting the evidence, because variation in compliance and implementation may reflect differences in policy design and enforcement context, rather than the presence or absence of calorie labelling requirements alone. This rapid review summarises international evidence published since 2015 on OOH food business responses to mandatory and/or voluntary menu calorie labelling. The review focuses on business compliance, the operational and business impacts of implementation, and changes to the calorie content of menu items. Consumer attitudes and behavioural responses are not included, as these have been addressed in previous FSS-commissioned research.
Terminology
Throughout this report, “menu calorie labelling” is used as an umbrella term to describe policies requiring energy information to be provided for OOH food and drink at the point of choice. Where jurisdictions require energy to be displayed in kilojoules (kJ), this is stated explicitly and referred to as “menu energy labelling (kJ)”. Where energy is displayed in kilocalories (kcal), we refer to “calorie labelling”. “Mandatory scheme” refers to statutory requirements with defined enforcement mechanisms, while “voluntary scheme” refers to initiatives without legal obligation. In describing study findings, “business” or “chain” refers to the operating company or brand, while “outlet”, “premises”, or “location” refers to an individual site; the unit of analysis is specified where relevant.
Large chain businesses are not defined using a single threshold across the evidence base. In this report, the term generally refers to multi-site restaurant or food-service businesses that meet the relevant jurisdiction-specific thresholds for menu labelling. These include, for example, chains with 20 or more locations in the United States and Ontario, chain businesses meeting state-level outlet thresholds in Australia, and businesses with 250 or more employees in England. Where an included study uses a different operational definition, this is stated in the text.