IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/gam/jsusta/v11y2019i6p1587-d214262.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Consumer Preferences for Different Designs of Carbon Footprint Labelling on Tomatoes in Germany—Does Design Matter?

Author

Listed:
  • Stephan G.H. Meyerding

    (Department of Agricultural Economics and Rural Development, Georg-August-Universität Göttingen, 37073 Göttingen, Germany
    Department of Nutritional Sciences, Hochschule für Angewandte Wissenschaften Hamburg (HAW Hamburg), 21033 Hamburg, Germany)

  • Anna-Lena Schaffmann

    (Faculty of Economic Sciences, Georg-August-Universität Göttingen, 37073 Göttingen, Germany)

  • Mira Lehberger

    (Department of Fresh Produce Logistics, Hochschule Geisenheim University, 65366 Geisenheim, Germany)

Abstract

The climate impact of tomato production is an important issue in the sustainability of tomatoes, especially in northern European countries, such as Germany. Communicating the climate impact of products to the consumer is difficult and the design of the label might be the key to its success. For this reason, the present study compares the utilities of six different carbon footprint labels to evaluate which label design works best for the consumer. 598 consumers were surveyed in a representative online choice-experiment. The participants had to choose between tomatoes with different product characteristics, such as origin, price, organic label, and carbon footprint label. A split sample approach was used where each sub-sample with around n = 100 saw a different carbon footprint label design in the choice-experiment. The results suggest that qualitative carbon footprint labels using color-coded traffic light labelling are superior to those that claim climate impact reduction or neutrality, including those that provide more details regarding the climate impact of the product and the company. The latent class analysis with four consumer segments shows that a significant proportion of consumers in Germany would consider a carbon footprint label as an important characteristic.

Suggested Citation

  • 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.
    • Handle: RePEc:gam:jsusta:v:11:y:2019:i:6:p:1587-:d:214262
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://www.mdpi.com/2071-1050/11/6/1587/pdf
    Download Restriction: no
    File URL: https://www.mdpi.com/2071-1050/11/6/1587/
    Download Restriction: no
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Gunne Grankvist & Ulf Dahlstrand & Anders Biel, 2004. "The Impact of Environmental Labelling on Consumer Preference: Negative vs. Positive Labels," Journal of Consumer Policy, Springer, vol. 27(2), pages 213-230, June.
    2. Antle, John M., 2001. "Economic analysis of food safety," Handbook of Agricultural Economics, in: B. L. Gardner & G. C. Rausser (ed.), Handbook of Agricultural Economics, edition 1, volume 1, chapter 19, pages 1083-1136, Elsevier.
    3. Bruno S. Frey, 1997. "Not Just for the Money," Books, Edward Elgar Publishing, number 1183.
    4. Gadema, Zaina & Oglethorpe, David, 2011. "The use and usefulness of carbon labelling food: A policy perspective from a survey of UK supermarket shoppers," Food Policy, Elsevier, vol. 36(6), pages 815-822.
    5. Paul E. Green & Abba M. Krieger & Yoram Wind, 2001. "Thirty Years of Conjoint Analysis: Reflections and Prospects," Interfaces, INFORMS, vol. 31(3_supplem), pages 56-73, June.
    6. Klaus G. Grunert, 2005. "Food quality and safety: consumer perception and demand," European Review of Agricultural Economics, Oxford University Press and the European Agricultural and Applied Economics Publications Foundation, vol. 32(3), pages 369-391, September.
    7. Teisl, Mario F. & Rubin, Jonathan & Noblet, Caroline L., 2008. "Non-dirty dancing? Interactions between eco-labels and consumers," Journal of Economic Psychology, Elsevier, vol. 29(2), pages 140-159, April.
    8. Sue Hornibrook & Claire May & Andrew Fearne, 2015. "Sustainable Development and the Consumer: Exploring the Role of Carbon Labelling in Retail Supply Chains," Business Strategy and the Environment, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 24(4), pages 266-276, May.
    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. Christoph F. Wiedenroth & Verena Otter, 2022. "Can new healthy luxury food products accelerate short food supply chain formation via social media marketing in high-income countries?," Agricultural and Food Economics, Springer;Italian Society of Agricultural Economics (SIDEA), vol. 10(1), pages 1-30, December.
    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. Angelo Corallo & Maria Elena Latino & Marta Menegoli & Biagia De Devitiis & Rosaria Viscecchia, 2019. "Human Factor in Food Label Design to Support Consumer Healthcare and Safety: A Systematic Literature Review," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 11(15), pages 1-14, July.
    4. Maria Teresa Trentinaglia De Daverio & Teresina Mancuso & Massimo Peri & Lucia Baldi, 2020. "How Does Consumers’ Care for Origin Shape Their Behavioural Gap for Environmentally Friendly Products?," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 13(1), pages 1-19, December.
    5. Nathalie Gröfke & Valérie Duplat & Christopher Wickert & Brian Tjemkes, 2021. "A Multi-Stakeholder Perspective on Food Labelling for Environmental Sustainability: Attitudes, Perceived Barriers, and Solution Approaches towards the “Traffic Light Index”," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 13(2), pages 1-23, January.
    6. Latino Maria Elena & Menegoli Marta & Corallo Angelo, 2023. "Relevant Attributes Influencing Consumers’ Tomato Acceptance: A Systematic Review and Research Agenda," Journal of Agricultural & Food Industrial Organization, De Gruyter, vol. 21(2), pages 129-146, December.
    7. 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.
    8. 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.
    9. 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).
    10. Catalin M. Stancu & Alice Grønhøj & Liisa Lähteenmäki, 2020. "Meanings and Motives for Consumers’ Sustainable Actions in the Food and Clothing Domains," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 12(24), pages 1-25, December.

    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. Hempel, Corinna & Feucht, Yvonne & Zander, Katrin, 2022. "The Gap between Citizens’ Concerns and Consumers’ Actions: Which Factors Impair the Adoption of Food-related Mitigation Options?," International Journal on Food System Dynamics, International Center for Management, Communication, and Research, vol. 13(01), January.
    2. Yan, Zhen & Zhou, Jie-hong, 2015. "Measuring consumer heterogeneous preferences for pork traits under media reports: choice experiment in sixteen traceability pilot cities, China," 2015 Conference, August 9-14, 2015, Milan, Italy 212609, International Association of Agricultural Economists.
    3. Baddeley, Shane & Cheng, Peter & Wolfe, Robert, 2011. "Trade Policy Implications of Carbon Labels on Food," Commissioned Papers 122740, Canadian Agricultural Trade Policy Research Network.
    4. Lars Petersen & Jacob Hörisch & Kathleen Jacobs, 2021. "Worse is worse and better doesn't matter?: The effects of favorable and unfavorable environmental information on consumers’ willingness to pay," Journal of Industrial Ecology, Yale University, vol. 25(5), pages 1338-1356, October.
    5. 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.
    6. Rui Zhao & Meng Yang & Jianxiao Liu & Linchuan Yang & Zhikang Bao & Xinyun Ren, 2020. "University Students’ Purchase Intention and Willingness to Pay for Carbon-Labeled Food Products: A Purchase Decision-Making Experiment," IJERPH, MDPI, vol. 17(19), pages 1-15, September.
    7. Yan, Zhen & Zhou, Jie-hong, 2015. "Measuring consumer heterogeneous preferences for pork traits under media reports: choice experiment in sixteen traceability pilot cities, China," 2015 Conference, August 9-14, 2015, Milan, Italy 211884, International Association of Agricultural Economists.
    8. 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.
    9. Carmen Bălan, 2020. "How Does Retail Engage Consumers in Sustainable Consumption? A Systematic Literature Review," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 13(1), pages 1-25, December.
    10. Francesca Colantuoni & Gianni Cicia & Teresa Del Giudice & Daniel Lass & Francesco Caracciolo & Pasquale Lombardi, 2016. "Heterogeneous Preferences for Domestic Fresh Produce: Evidence from German and Italian Early Potato Markets," Agribusiness, John Wiley & Sons, Ltd., vol. 32(4), pages 512-530, November.
    11. Steiner, B.E. & Peschel, A.O. & Grebitus, C., 2017. "Multi-Product Category Choices Labeled for Ecological Footprints: Exploring Psychographics and Evolved Psychological Biases for Characterizing Latent Consumer Classes," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 140(C), pages 251-264.
    12. von Meyer-Höfer, Marie & Spiller, Achim, 2014. "“Sustainability” a semi-globalisable concept for international food marketing - Consumer expectations regarding sustainable food – An explorative survey in industrialised and emerging countries," GlobalFood Discussion Papers 182513, Georg-August-Universitaet Goettingen, GlobalFood, Department of Agricultural Economics and Rural Development.
    13. Bansal, Sangeeta & Chakravarty, Sujoy & Ramaswami, Bharat, 2013. "The informational and signaling impacts of labels: experimental evidence from India on GM foods," Environment and Development Economics, Cambridge University Press, vol. 18(6), pages 701-722, December.
    14. Paolo Prosperi & Daniele Vergamini & Fabio Bartolini, 2020. "Exploring institutional arrangements for local fish product labelling in Tuscany (Italy): a convention theory perspective," Agricultural and Food Economics, Springer;Italian Society of Agricultural Economics (SIDEA), vol. 8(1), pages 1-16, December.
    15. Kyriakos Riskos & Paraskevi (Evi) Dekoulou & Naoum Mylonas & George Tsourvakas, 2021. "Ecolabels and the Attitude–Behavior Relationship towards Green Product Purchase: A Multiple Mediation Model," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 13(12), pages 1-22, June.
    16. Pleshcheva, Vlada, 2019. "Metric and Scale Effects in Consumer Preferences for Environmental Benefits," Rationality and Competition Discussion Paper Series 147, CRC TRR 190 Rationality and Competition.
    17. Sue Hornibrook & Claire May & Andrew Fearne, 2015. "Sustainable Development and the Consumer: Exploring the Role of Carbon Labelling in Retail Supply Chains," Business Strategy and the Environment, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 24(4), pages 266-276, May.
    18. Andy Grinnall & Simon Burnett, 2015. "First Catch Your Fish: Designing a “Low Energy Fish” Label," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 7(5), pages 1-16, May.
    19. Baumeister, Stefan & Zeng, Cheng & Hoffendahl, Alex, 2022. "The effect of an eco-label on the booking decisions of air passengers," Transport Policy, Elsevier, vol. 124(C), pages 175-182.
    20. Yan, Zhen & Zhou, Jie-hong & Li, Kai, 2015. "Measuring consumer heterogeneous preferences for pork traits under media reports: choice experiment in sixteen traceability pilot cities," 2015 AAEA & WAEA Joint Annual Meeting, July 26-28, San Francisco, California 205599, Agricultural and Applied Economics Association.

    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:gam:jsusta:v:11:y:2019:i:6:p:1587-:d:214262. 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: MDPI Indexing Manager (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://www.mdpi.com .

    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.