Let's talk technical

When I first joined the company in 1991, manufacturers would come to me and say, 'I want this ingredient'," says Pauline Taggart. "Then it developed into, 'I have this technical problem, what's the solution?'" Fast forward 15 years, she says, "and it sometimes feels more like they are saying 'this is what marketing would like me to do, and I would like you to do it instead'!"

In fact, major manufacturers are increasingly developing very fruitful partnerships with suppliers such as National Starch because they are under such pressure from their customers that more traditional ways of doing business don't work anymore, says Taggart.

"Our customers are reducing their technical staff in some cases, but they are also recognising the benefits of collaborating with us, whether we're talking about the supply chain or about joint consumer research. It's not just about our NPD people working with their NPD people anymore."

Translating science into something that the average person can understand is Taggart's forte. "It's no good going to the manufacturer with a pot of gluey, snotty waxy maize starch and saying, 'here it is!' It's not much use to them like that. They want to know how it's going to work in a ready meal, which means you have to understand recipe development."

Her first big project was introducing National Starch's N-Lite range of fat mimetics into Europe in the mid-1990s. "Prior to N-Lite there were starch-based gels to replace some of the functionality of fat," she explains. "N-Lite was different. We were actually imitating the rheology of fat by manipulating the structure of the starch to develop molecules of a specific size and shape."

As her career progressed, she moved from Manchester to Hamburg into a business development role. "It felt like the right time. We had this leading position in carbohydrate nutrition, which was relatively new, but there was a lot of science behind it and I could see that with legislation changing, being able to introduce this aspect of nutrition by working with marketing, regulatory and clinical nutrition people was definitely the way forward."

Currently based in Strasbourg, Taggart now "travels a lot talking to manufacturers. I also work with internal R&D and marketing people to see how we can apply the research, bearing in mind regulatory and labelling issues."

Keeping it clean

One of these issues, of course, is the move towards 'clean' labels. Given that a growing number of ingredients, including modified starch, are now out of favour with major manufacturers and retailers, National Starch has developed successful clean-label alternatives, such as Homecraft functional flours.

Whether there is actually anything wrong with 'modified starch' in the first place or not isn't the point, insists Taggart, who won't be drawn on the issue of whether product reformulation is being driven by sound science or (misinformed) consumer anxiety. The point is, she says, "more and more consumers are looking at labels, and they want 'all natural' and 'no added' and we have to respond to that.

"Having said that, there are certain applications where in order for a product to have a particular functionality - to go through the chilled food chain or have a certain shelf-life, you will need an ingredient that has been modified in some way."

It can be frustrating however, when things intended to help consumers - such as legislation - have unintended consequences, she says. "Take E-numbers [additives approved for use in the EU]. They were created to reassure consumers, but look at how they reacted. Legislators play a critical role in this industry. The future of functional foods in Europe will very much depend on how legislators help support health claims being introduced into mainstream food products."

The new Nutrition and Health Claims Regulation is positive in theory, especially if it gets rid of some cowboys, she says. "My concern is whether the European Food Safety Authority (EFSA) has the resources to deal with applications and issues promptly. I still don't think it realises what it has taken on board. It will have 27 Member States seeking approval for up to 500 claims that are already on the market before it even starts assessing new claims."

Reformulate or die?

On spiralling obesity levels, she says the food industry hasn't simply enabled consumers to continue following bad eating habits without guilt by introducing technological wizardry.

Ideally, we would all eat only natural, healthy foods, she adds, but fundamental changes to diet and lifestyle will not happen overnight.

"If you are in own-label, there is scope to develop new products from scratch that use only healthy ingredients. But if you are a big brand and your entire business is based around products like cakes, you don't have so many choices. You can reformulate, but people still want a muffin to taste like a muffin. The alternative is to launch into entirely new healthy areas with new brands. But that is very risky and it takes a huge amount of time and money."

Vive la difference!

Another difficulty facing companies selling into multiple markets is that what is seen as healthy by consumers in Sweden may not hold much appeal to someone in Spain, she adds. "Attitudes to health are culturally determined. I have a Swedish friend for whom dark is healthy; things like rye breads. In southern Europe, energy is a good thing: carbs set you up for the day."

Communication is therefore critically important, especially when you are talking about long-term health benefits. "Bring up cancer and people will leave the room," she observes. "How do you find the right words? If consumers can't grasp the concept of glycaemic response, talking about insulin is one step beyond that, and you are going to lose people along the way."