Why emulsifiers deserve a second look

Key takeaways:

• Emulsifiers remain vital for texture, stability and waste reduction, even as clean label trends push for shorter ingredient lists.
• Consumer perception often lags behind science, with emulsifiers unfairly viewed as ‘unnatural’ despite decades of proven safety and functionality.
• The clean label future isn’t about removal but transparency, as smart formulation and education can rebuild trust in functional ingredients.

Emulsifiers may be the most misunderstood ingredients in bakery today. As clean label ideals collide with real-world functionality, the industry is learning that smart chemistry and sustainability often go hand-in-hand.

At IBIE in Las Vegas, the air buzzed with the low hum of mixers, conveyors and booth demos promising faster, cleaner, greener baking. Among the flashing screens and product tastings, Sheila M. Rice, key account director at Palsgaard A/S, talked about something few visitors stopped to photograph for Instagram: emulsifiers.

“They’re not glamorous,” she admitted, “but they’re everywhere. And they matter.”

Rice has spent her career helping manufacturers understand why these tiny, often misunderstood molecules underpinned so much of modern bakery production. “The biggest misconception about emulsifiers is that they harm you – that they’re poison and that having them in your food is not a good thing.”

In reality, emulsifiers are quiet workhorses. “They do so many different things that can make a baker’s life easier,” she explained. “They can lighten a dough without changing its structure, make chocolate move more smoothly through production or give cakes the uniform crumb people expect.”

What is often overlooked is scale. “We’re talking about fractions of a percent. Sometimes less than half a percent makes the difference between a line that runs smoothly and one that wastes product. That’s not just technical efficiency – that’s sustainability.”

Functionality met perception

At IBIE, conversations about ingredients always circled back to consumer perception. Emulsifiers, despite their proven track record, have become victims of their own complexity. “It’s always a balancing act,” said Rice. “You can make changes – add more eggs or fats – but that drives up cost. Emulsifiers give bakers another lever to adjust texture or shelf life without hurting margins.”

That balancing act has grown even trickier as inflation squeezed both shoppers and suppliers. “Our customers know their consumers are paying close attention to every label,” she said. “They need to balance what’s right for the product with what feels right to the consumer.”

The European approach to labeling highlighted that communication gap. “Over there, emulsifiers often appear as E-numbers – E471, for instance, is just mono- and diglycerides. They’ve been thoroughly tested and approved. But in the US, we spell out the chemical names, which makes them sound scarier even though it’s the same safe ingredient.”

That fear factor, she argues, has more to do with perception than science. “These materials have been studied for decades. Different countries have different rules, but the science is the same: they’re safe and functional.”

Rice believes it’s time for the industry to reclaim that narrative. “Clean label shouldn’t mean chemistry-free,” she said. “It should mean using only what’s needed and understanding why it’s there.”

Natural wasn’t always simple

The loudest pressure point is the consumer push for ‘natural’ ingredients. But natural didn’t always mean simple.

“Once you remove something, you realize how much that ingredient was actually doing,” said Rice. “Taking out an emulsifier can change dough stability, volume, even how flavor comes through. The label might look cleaner, but the process can fall apart.”

Her advice to R&D teams is to move slowly. “If you’re removing emulsifiers, focus only on that. Don’t also switch colors, flavors and fats in the same reformulation. Otherwise, you’ll never know what’s really causing the change.”

Rice was quick to dispel the idea that ‘natural’ automatically meant ‘easier’. “Nature is chemistry, too,” she said. “If you look at the molecular structure of natural compounds, they’re often more complex than synthetic ones. It’s not as simple as saying, ‘I want a natural strawberry flavor.’ That same flavor behaves differently in dough, in filling and in glaze.”

Texture, she added, has become a quiet obsession in bakery R&D. “Consumers might not have the vocabulary for it, but they know when something feels off,” she said. “They’ll say, ‘It’s too mushy’, or ‘The icing melts too fast’. Those little details – the mouthfeel, the crumb, the stability – are what emulsifiers protect.”

According to industry data, texture claims now appeared on nearly one-third of new bakery product launches. “It’s part of the indulgence equation,” Rice noted. “Flavor gets the attention, but texture is what makes people reach for that second bite.”

A smarter path forward

Despite decades of proven use, Rice said emulsifiers are still misunderstood – even by some who work with them daily. “A lot of people know they’re using one, but they can’t always say why or how it works.”

That’s why Palsgaard spends so much time on education. “We’ll show two emulsifiers that look identical on paper,” Rice said. “One needs heat to activate; the other works in cold water. If you don’t know that, your process can fail before it even starts.”

She shared a recent example from a confectionery client. “They were making a chocolate-coated peanut filling. Peanut oil is liquid at room temperature and wants to escape. If it seeps into the chocolate, you get that white bloom on the surface. With the right emulsifier, you can stabilize the filling so it stays intact. That’s the difference between a product that looks perfect for a week and one that still looks perfect after two.”

It’s in these moments – the ones most consumers never see – that emulsifiers quietly prove their worth. “They help cut waste, save energy and deliver consistency,” she said. “If your dough runs faster or your batter aerates better, you’re saving time and reducing losses. Multiply that across thousands of tons of product and the impact is significant.”

Rice believes the next phase of the clean label movement will be less about subtraction and more about transparency. “Consumers aren’t anti-science,” she said. “They just want to understand what’s in their food. If we can explain why these ingredients exist and how little is needed, we can build trust again.

“The future isn’t about getting rid of emulsifiers. It’s about using them intelligently – and showing how they help make food better and more sustainable.”

Clean label, she insisted, doesn’t have to mean compromise. “Smart formulation isn’t the enemy of clean label,” she said. “It’s how we make clean label possible.”