Climate Labels On Food : 'Negative Warning Is More Efficient Than Positive Recommendation'

Labeling information about the climate impact of foods on products such as red meat is an effective way to stop consumers from choosing options that have a negative impact on the planet. This is the conclusion of a study by scientists at Johns Hopkins University and Harvard University in the United States.

Policymakers have long been looking for strategies that could encourage the population to limit the consumption of food with a large ecological footprint. In April this year it hit

Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC) is urging world leaders, especially in developed countries, to support a transition to sustainable, healthy and low-emission diets.

This new American study shows that consumers show positive reactions to climate labeling on their food. The respondents were confronted in a store with products with a green or red label. A green label represented products with a low climate impact (chicken, fish or vegetarian food), while a red label warned of food with a large ecological footprint (red meat).

Compared to participants from a control group, who were not offered any ecological label, the presence of a red label - warning of high greenhouse gas emissions and a strong contribution to climate change - appeared to be the option for a sustainable product with 23, increase by 5 percent. When working with a green label – whereby the customer was informed about low greenhouse gas emissions and a limited contribution to climate change – the choice for a sustainable product increased by 9.9 percent.

Respondents who had chosen a sustainable product believed in both options that their option was more positive for human health than the alternative offer.

Most Efficient

The researchers point out that animal food consumption, mainly driven by beef production, is responsible for 14.5 percent of global greenhouse gas emissions and is also a major modifiable contributor to climate change. "In the United States, meat consumption, particularly of red meat, consistently exceeds levels indicated by national dietary guidelines," the scientists argue. "A shift from current dietary patterns toward more sustainable diets with lower red meat consumption could reduce greenhouse gas emissions from the population's menu by up to 55 percent.

"It can be concluded that a warning of a negative effect on the consumer has more influence than providing the customer with information about a sustainable choice," the researchers argue. 'After all, it appears that labeling red meat with a label that has a negative message, with a warning of a high climate impact, encourages more consumers to make a sustainable choice than labeling more environmentally friendly products with a green label, with a low impact on the climate is informed.'