Effects of environmental impact labels on the sustainability of food purchases: Two randomised controlled trials in an experimental online supermarket
Effects of environmental impact labels on the sustainability of food purchases: Two randomised controlled trials in an experimental online supermarket
Christina Potter1, Rachel Pechey1, Michael Clark2, Kerstin Frie1, Paul A. Bateman1, Brian Cook1, Cristina Stewart1, Carmen Piernas1, John Lynch3, Mike Rayner4, Joseph Poore5, Susan A. Jebb1
1 Nuffield Department of Primary Care Health Sciences, Radcliffe Observatory Quarter, University of Oxford, Oxford, United Kingdom
2 Oxford Martin Programme on the Future of Food and Nuffield Department of Population Health, University of Oxford, Oxford, Department of Zoology, University of Oxford, Oxford, School of Geography & Environment, University of Oxford, Oxford, Smith School of Enterprise and Environment, University of Oxford, Oxford, United Kingdom
3 Department of Physics, University of Oxford, Clarendon Laboratory, Oxford, United Kingdom
4 Oxford Martin Programme on the Future of Food and Nuffield Department of Population Health, University of Oxford, Oxford, United Kingdom
5 Department of Zoology, University of Oxford, Oxford, United Kingdom, School of Geography & Environment, University of Oxford, Oxford, United Kingdom
One way to help consumers make better, more sustainable food choices is through product-specific environmental impact labels. This article discusses two studies testing the effectiveness of different ecolabels using an experimental online supermarket platform. It finds ecolabels to be a promising intervention in the promotion of more sustainable products.
Providing consumers with product-specific environmental impact information for food products (ecolabels) may promote more sustainable purchasing, needed to meet global environmental targets. Two UK studies investigated the effectiveness of different ecolabels using an experimental online supermarket platform. Study 1 (N = 1051 participants) compared three labels against control (no label), while Study 2 (N = 4979) tested four designs against control. Study 1 found significant reductions in the environmental impact score (EIS) for all labels compared to control (labels presented: values for four environmental indicators [-3.9 percentiles, 95%CIs: -5.2,-2.6]; a composite score [taking values from A to E; -3.9, 95%CIs: -5.2,-2.5]; or both together [-3.2, 95%CIs: -4.5,-1.9]). Study 2 showed significant reductions in EIS compared to control for A-E labels [-2.3, 95%CIs: -3.0,-1.5], coloured globes with A-E scores [-3.2, 95%CIs:-3.9,-2.4], and red globes highlighting ’worse’ products [-3.2, 95%CIs:-3.9,-2.5]. There was no evidence that green globes highlighting ’better’ products were effective [-0.5, 95%CIs:-1.3,0.2]. Providing ecolabels is a promising intervention to promote the selection of more sustainable products.
Publication details
Potter C, Pechey R, Clark M, Frie K, Bateman PA, Cook B, et al. (2022) Effects of environmental impact labels on the sustainability of food purchases: Two randomised controlled trials in an experimental online supermarket. PLoS ONE 17(11): e0272800. https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0272800
