IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/bla/eurcho/v20y2021i2p23-29.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Improving Consumers’ Understanding and Use of Carbon Footprint Labels on Food: Proposal for a Climate Score Label

Author

Listed:
  • Dominic Lemken
  • Anke Zühlsdorf
  • Achim Spiller

Abstract

Today, the food sector is largely excluded from climate protection policies. Nevertheless, the food sector is responsible for about 20 per cent of greenhouse gases. Food policies could substantially contribute to the EU’s ambitious climate goals. Currently, the debate on CO2‐e labelling is gaining momentum. Consumers know very little about the climate footprint associated with food choices. A climate label would strengthen consumer knowledge, may eventually influence food choices, could trigger reformulation efforts, raises awareness, and contribute to better informed discussions about climate policy. Based on a review of the current state of research and industry developments on designing CO2 footprint labels, this article provides recommendations on how to develop a clearly understood and trustworthy label. We propose a government approved, multi‐level, and categorical CO2‐e label, with colour coding and numeric CO2 equivalents; primarily based initially on median values. The design of the label should allow for an adoption of other environmental dimensions in the future. It should be scaled to weight (CO2‐e per kg) and apply to food products and meals. In the proposed form, a CO2‐e label is a low‐cost instrument. As more and more companies are already starting to label their products in different ways, consumer confusion is likely to rise if no uniform guidelines are established. Aujourd'hui, le secteur alimentaire est largement exclu des politiques de protection du climat. Il est néanmoins responsable d'environ 20 pour cent des gaz à effet de serre. Les politiques alimentaires pourraient contribuer de manière substantielle aux objectifs climatiques ambitieux de l'Union européenne. Actuellement, le débat sur l'étiquetage des équivalents CO2 (CO2‐e) prend de l'ampleur. Les consommateurs connaissent très peu l'empreinte climatique associée aux choix alimentaires. Un label climatique renforcerait les connaissances des consommateurs, pourrait à terme influencer les choix alimentaires, et pourrait déclencher des efforts de reformulation, sensibiliser et contribuer à des discussions mieux informées sur la politique climatique. A partir d’un examen de l'état actuel de la recherche et des évolutions de l'industrie sur la conception d'étiquettes d'empreinte CO2, cet article fournit des recommandations sur la façon de développer une étiquette clairement comprise et digne de confiance. Nous proposons une étiquette CO2‐e approuvée par les pouvoirs publics, avec plusieurs niveaux et catégories, et un codage couleur et des équivalents CO2 numériques. Il serait principalement fondé initialement sur des valeurs médianes. La conception du label devrait permettre l'adoption d'autres dimensions environnementales à l'avenir. Il doit être mis à l'échelle en fonction du poids (CO2‐e par kg) et s'appliquer aux produits alimentaires et aux repas. Dans la forme proposée, une étiquette CO2‐e est un instrument à faible coût. Comme de plus en plus d'entreprises commencent déjà à étiqueter leurs produits de différentes manières, la confusion des consommateurs risque de s'accroître si aucune directive uniforme n'est établie. Der Lebensmittelsektor wird gegenwärtig von der Klimaschutzpolitik weitestgehend ausgenommen. Dennoch ist er für etwa 20 Prozent der Treibhausgase verantwortlich. Die Lebensmittelpolitik könnte einen wesentlichen Beitrag zu den ambitionierten Klimazielen der EU leisten. Derzeit gewinnt die Diskussion über ein CO2‐Label an Bedeutung. Verbraucherinnen und Verbraucher wissen häufig wenig über den CO2‐Fußabdruck, der mit der Wahl ihrer Lebensmittel verbunden ist. Ein Klimalabel würde nicht nur ihr Wissen über den CO2‐Fußabdruck verbessern, sondern möglicherweise auch ihre Wahl von Lebensmitteln beeinflussen. Das CO2‐Label könnte darüber hinaus Änderungen in der Lebensmittelzusammensetzung anstoßen, ein Bewusstsein schaffen und zu besser fundierten Diskussionen über die Klimapolitik beitragen. Dieser Artikel gibt auf der Basis eines Reviews zum aktuellen Stand der Forschung und der Entwicklungen in der Lebensmittelindustrie Empfehlungen für die Entwicklung eines leichtverständlichen und vertrauenswürdigen Labels. Wir schlagen ein staatlich zertifiziertes, mehrstufiges und in Kategorien eingeteiltes Klimalabel mit Farbkodierung und numerischen CO2‐Äquivalenten vor, das zunächst überwiegend auf mittleren Werten basieren soll. Die Ausgestaltung des Labels sollte darüber hinaus die Möglichkeit beinhalten, zukünftig auch andere Umweltdimensionen mit aufzunehmen. Es sollte sich auf das Gewicht (CO2‐Äquivalente pro kg) beziehen und für Lebensmittel und Mahlzeiten gelten. In der vorgeschlagenen Form ist das Klimalabel ein kostengünstiges Instrument. Bereits jetzt kennzeichnen immer mehr Unternehmen ihre Produkte auf unterschiedliche Art und Weise. Die Kennzeichnungsvielfalt trägt zu einer steigenden Verwirrung der Verbraucherinnen und Verbraucher bei, falls keine einheitliche Festlegung von Richtlinien erfolgen sollte.

Suggested Citation

  • Dominic Lemken & Anke Zühlsdorf & Achim Spiller, 2021. "Improving Consumers’ Understanding and Use of Carbon Footprint Labels on Food: Proposal for a Climate Score Label," EuroChoices, The Agricultural Economics Society, vol. 20(2), pages 23-29, August.
  • Handle: RePEc:bla:eurcho:v:20:y:2021:i:2:p:23-29
    DOI: 10.1111/1746-692X.12321
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://doi.org/10.1111/1746-692X.12321
    Download Restriction: no

    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1111/1746-692X.12321?utm_source=ideas
    LibKey link: if access is restricted and if your library uses this service, LibKey will redirect you to where you can use your library subscription to access this item
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Adrian R. Camilleri & Richard P. Larrick & Shajuti Hossain & Dalia Patino-Echeverri, 2019. "Consumers underestimate the emissions associated with food but are aided by labels," Nature Climate Change, Nature, vol. 9(1), pages 53-58, January.
    2. Mika Kortelainen & Jibonayan Raychaudhuri & Beatrice Roussillon, 2016. "Effects Of Carbon Reduction Labels: Evidence From Scanner Data," Economic Inquiry, Western Economic Association International, vol. 54(2), pages 1167-1187, April.
    3. Feucht, Yvonne & Zander, Katrin, 2017. "Consumers' attitudes on carbon footprint labelling: Results of the SUSDIET project," Thünen Working Papers 78, Johann Heinrich von Thünen Institute, Federal Research Institute for Rural Areas, Forestry and Fisheries.
    4. Feucht, Yvonne & Zander, Katrin, 2017. "Consumers’ attitudes on carbon footprint labelling. Results of the SUSDIET project," Thünen Working Paper 266396, Johann Heinrich von Thünen-Institut (vTI), Federal Research Institute for Rural Areas, Forestry and Fisheries.
    5. Liu, Tiantian & Wang, Qunwei & Su, Bin, 2016. "A review of carbon labeling: Standards, implementation, and impact," Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews, Elsevier, vol. 53(C), pages 68-79.
    6. Stephan G.H. Meyerding & Anna-Lena Schaffmann & Mira Lehberger, 2019. "Consumer Preferences for Different Designs of Carbon Footprint Labelling on Tomatoes in Germany—Does Design Matter?," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 11(6), pages 1-30, March.
    7. Wim Verbeke, 2005. "Agriculture and the food industry in the information age," European Review of Agricultural Economics, Oxford University Press and the European Agricultural and Applied Economics Publications Foundation, vol. 32(3), pages 347-368, September.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    Citations

    Citations are extracted by the CitEc Project, subscribe to its RSS feed for this item.
    as


    Cited by:

    1. Aya Rezazga & Carlos Ruiz & Giuseppe Montanaro & Giacomo Falcone & Georgios Koubouris, 2024. "Driving the Ecological Transition of Agriculture through Voluntary Certification of Environmental Impacts: An Exploratory Literature Review on the Olive-Oil Sector," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 16(3), pages 1-34, February.
    2. Casati, Mirta & Soregaroli, Claudio & Rommel, Jens & Luzzani, Gloria & Stranieri, Stefanella, 2023. "Please keep ordering! A natural field experiment assessing a carbon label introduction," Food Policy, Elsevier, vol. 120(C).
    3. Gesa Stremmel & Ossama Elshiewy & Yasemin Boztug, 2024. "Climate‐neutral labeling for climate‐friendly vs. climate‐harmful food products: Consumer perceptions and implications," Business Strategy and the Environment, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 33(5), pages 4441-4455, July.
    4. Giuseppe Craparo & Elisa Isabel Cano Montero & Jesús Fernando Santos Peñalver, 2024. "Trends in the circular economy applied to the agricultural sector in the framework of the SDGs," Environment, Development and Sustainability: A Multidisciplinary Approach to the Theory and Practice of Sustainable Development, Springer, vol. 26(10), pages 26699-26729, October.
    5. Laura M. König & Vera Araújo‐Soares, 2023. "Will the Farm to Fork strategy be effective in changing food consumption behavior? A health psychology perspective," Applied Economic Perspectives and Policy, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 45(2), pages 785-802, June.

    Most related items

    These are the items that most often cite the same works as this one and are cited by the same works as this one.
    1. Djamel Rahmani & Zein Kallas & Maria Pappa & José Maria Gil, 2019. "Are Consumers’ Egg Preferences Influenced by Animal-Welfare Conditions and Environmental Impacts?," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 11(22), pages 1-23, November.
    2. Isabel Carrero & Carmen Valor & Estela Díaz & Victoria Labajo, 2021. "Designed to Be Noticed: A Reconceptualization of Carbon Food Labels as Warning Labels," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 13(3), pages 1-14, February.
    3. Schleich, Joachim & Alsheimer, Sven, 2024. "The relationship between willingness to pay and carbon footprint knowledge: Are individuals willing to pay more to offset their carbon footprint if they learn about its size and distance to the 1.5 °C," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 219(C).
    4. Rui Zhao & Dingye Wu & Sebastiano Patti, 2020. "A Bibliometric Analysis of Carbon Labeling Schemes in the Period 2007–2019," Energies, MDPI, vol. 13(16), pages 1-16, August.
    5. Anna Lewandowska & Katarzyna Joachimiak-Lechman & Przemysław Kurczewski, 2021. "A Dataset Quality Assessment—An Insight and Discussion on Selected Elements of Environmental Footprints Methodology," Energies, MDPI, vol. 14(16), pages 1-23, August.
    6. repec:cup:judgdm:v:15:y:2020:i:6:p:972-988 is not listed on IDEAS
    7. Cao, Ying (Jessica) & Cranfield, John & Chen, Chen & Widowski, Tina, 2021. "Heterogeneous informational and attitudinal impacts on consumer preferences for eggs from welfare enhanced cage systems," Food Policy, Elsevier, vol. 99(C).
    8. Du, Xiaoyun & Meng, Conghui & Guo, Zhenhua & Yan, Hang, 2023. "An improved approach for measuring the efficiency of low carbon city practice in China," Energy, Elsevier, vol. 268(C).
    9. Mario Herberz & Tobias Brosch & Ulf J. J. Hahnel, 2020. "Kilo what? Default units increase value sensitivity in joint evaluations of energy efficiency," Judgment and Decision Making, Society for Judgment and Decision Making, vol. 15(6), pages 972-988, November.
    10. Šárka Velčovská & Giacomo Del Chiappa, 2015. "The Food Quality Labels: Awareness and Willingness to Pay in the Context of the Czech Republic," Acta Universitatis Agriculturae et Silviculturae Mendelianae Brunensis, Mendel University Press, vol. 63(2), pages 647-658.
    11. Stoeckli, Sabrina & Merian, Sybilla & Wanner, Silvan & Stucki, Matthias & Chaudhary, Abhishek, 2024. "Advancing Biodiversity Footprinting for Food-Related Behavior Change," OSF Preprints zpvq4, Center for Open Science.
    12. Yokessa, Maïmouna & Marette, Stéphan, 2019. "A Review of Eco-labels and their Economic Impact," International Review of Environmental and Resource Economics, now publishers, vol. 13(1-2), pages 119-163, April.
    13. Balcombe, Kelvin & Fraser, Iain & Falco, Salvatore Di, 2010. "Traffic lights and food choice: A choice experiment examining the relationship between nutritional food labels and price," Food Policy, Elsevier, vol. 35(3), pages 211-220, June.
    14. Wixe, Sofia & Nilsson, Pia & Naldi, Lucia & Westlund, Hans, 2017. "Disentangling Innovation in Small Food Firms: The role of External Knowledge, Support, and Collaboration," Working Paper Series in Economics and Institutions of Innovation 446, Royal Institute of Technology, CESIS - Centre of Excellence for Science and Innovation Studies.
    15. Martina E. Reitmeier & Jutta Roosen, 2015. "Life Transitions and Brand Switching: How Changes in Social Relationships are Linked to Changes in Yogurt Brand and Grocery Chain Choice," Canadian Journal of Agricultural Economics/Revue canadienne d'agroeconomie, Canadian Agricultural Economics Society/Societe canadienne d'agroeconomie, vol. 63(4), pages 475-490, December.
    16. Castro-Santa, Juana & Drews, Stefan & Bergh, Jeroen van den, 2023. "Nudging low-carbon consumption through advertising and social norms," Journal of Behavioral and Experimental Economics (formerly The Journal of Socio-Economics), Elsevier, vol. 102(C).
    17. Demont, Matty & Rutsaert, Pieter & Ndour, Maimouna & Verbeke, Wim & Seck, Papa Abdoulaye & Tollens, Eric, 2012. "Experimental auctions, collective induction and choice shift: Willingness-to-pay for rice quality in Senegal," 2012 Conference, August 18-24, 2012, Foz do Iguacu, Brazil 126861, International Association of Agricultural Economists.
    18. Manuel González-Rosado & Luis Parras-Alcántara & Jesús Aguilera-Huertas & Beatriz Lozano-García, 2021. "Building an Agroecological Process towards Agricultural Sustainability: A Case Study from Southern Spain," Agriculture, MDPI, vol. 11(10), pages 1-16, October.
    19. Anna K. Edenbrandt & Christian Gamborg & Bo Jellesmark Thorsen, 2020. "Observational learning in food choices: The effect of product familiarity and closeness of peers," Agribusiness, John Wiley & Sons, Ltd., vol. 36(3), pages 482-498, June.
    20. Sylwia Żakowska-Biemans & Agnieszka Tekień, 2017. "Free Range, Organic? Polish Consumers Preferences Regarding Information on Farming System and Nutritional Enhancement of Eggs: A Discrete Choice Based Experiment," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 9(11), pages 1-16, November.
    21. Fabio Boncinelli & Francesca Gerini & Benedetta Neri & Leonardo Casini, 2018. "Consumer willingness to pay for non‐mandatory indication of the fish catch zone," Agribusiness, John Wiley & Sons, Ltd., vol. 34(4), pages 728-741, October.

    More about this item

    Statistics

    Access and download statistics

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:bla:eurcho:v:20:y:2021:i:2:p:23-29. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    If CitEc recognized a bibliographic reference but did not link an item in RePEc to it, you can help with this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: Wiley Content Delivery (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://edirc.repec.org/data/eaaeeea.html .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.