Speaker
Description
Keywords: sustainability assessment, meta-sustainability label, eye-tracking
Introduction
The agri-food sector, responsible for 30% of global greenhouse gas emissions, heavily impacts sustainability, with consumers being key drivers for a more sustainable food sector (Garnett, 2013). However, they are still not fully aware of the environmental impact of their food consumption (Camilleri et al., 2019). To address this issue, the European Union plans to introduce a mandatory meta-sustainability label to support consumers in making more sustainable food choices (European Commission, 2023). This approach considers an extensive list of sustainability aspects and goes beyond information that consumers typically use to determine whether a food item is sustainable - such as the origin or packaging material (Torma & Thøgersen, 2023). A higher information density within a label may also require more information processing capacity and knowledge to process and understand the information (Grunert et al., 2013). The development of an ease-to-use label at the point of sale is therefore crucial for informed food choice, as excessive label complexity may lead to uncertainty and hinder sustainable choices (Thøgersen et al., 2010). Although highly relevant to consumer decision-making and corporate social responsibility, research on the effectiveness of meta-sustainability labels in supporting sustainable choices is scarce, particularly in understanding consumers' information needs during the evaluation process.
Objective
Our two studies, an online survey experiment, and an eye-tracking study, address the research gap and extend the literature on food labeling and information processing by evaluating how consumers process label information and apply it to their food choices. We derive behavioral insights into label use, and the cognitive resources needed to decode labels. Our research contributes to a differentiated understanding of label effectiveness in evaluation contexts by considering both internal and external sources of information (e.g., consumers' sustainability knowledge and supporting label information) as decisive determinants of label use and information processing.
Methods
Two studies were conducted to address the research objective. The first study used a between-subjects design, employing a 4x2 online experimental design to assess the effects of varying label dimensions and the presence of supporting label information. Participants evaluated labeled products within the same category. Following the judgments, participants' label use and self-confidence were measured. The second study, a behavioral eye-tracking study, examined consumers' metacognitive abilities in interpreting different label designs (Eco Score, Planet Score, Eaternity Score) during product evaluation. Participants' eye movements were tracked while evaluating food products. A questionnaire measuring sustainability knowledge and expert ratings provided an additional assessment of consumer evaluations.
Results
232 participants (MAge = 36.1 years; 68% female) participated in the first online study. We aimed to examine the indirect effects of different levels of label dimensions on the quality of assessments through label use, considering supportive label information. Using a moderated mediation PROCESS Model 8 (Hayes, 2013), we found that multidimensional labels (e.g., four-dimensional) compared to one-dimensional labels had a significant indirect effect (IE) through label usage in the absence of supportive label information (IE=.87; CI [.501, 1.33]). However, in the presence of supportive label information, this indirect effect was not significant (i.e., CIs included zero), suggesting that supportive information increases the use of simplified labels (e.g., one-dimensional labels).
In the second study (123 participants, MAge = 38.6 years; 63% female), we investigated the processing patterns of different existing label designs in the food market, which differ in label design complexity (Eco Score, Planet Score, Eaternity Score). ANOVA revealed that participants using traffic light labels (Eco Score and Planet Score) assessed the sustainability of food products accurately - comparable to experts (MPlanet Score = 3.09; MEco Score = 3.00; F(1;123) = 9.07, p < .001), including those with limited sustainability knowledge. Notably, self-confidence was significantly higher in the Eaternity group. Especially in the Eaternity Score group, consumers with low sustainability knowledge expressed higher self-confidence (MEaternity Score = 3.35, F(1;123) = 9.07, p < .001).
Conclusion
Across two studies we demonstrate how consumers respond to different label designs and demonstrate a boosting effect of label use through supportive label information, thereby improving the label effectiveness. One key finding is that a higher label dimension does not consistently predict sustainable choices and requires more visual processing time, even for the vulnerable consumer group with low sustainability knowledge. Interestingly, objective suitability to guide consumer assessment is not necessarily connected to perceived self-confidence in assessment. These findings contribute to a more nuanced understanding of label design effectiveness and extend previous research by considering supportive label information (Bollinger et al., 2022) and consumer knowledge (Hartmann et al., 2021) as decisive determinants of meta-sustainability label usage.
Literature
Bollinger, B., Liebman, E., Hammond, D., Hobin, E., & Sacco, J. (2022). Educational Campaigns for Product Labels: Evidence from On-Shelf Nutritional Labeling. Journal of Marketing Research, 59(1), 153–172. https://doi.org/10.1177/0022243720981975
Camilleri, A. R., Larrick, R. P., Hossain, S., & Patino-Echeverri, D. (2019). Consumers Underestimate the Emissions Associated with Food but are Aided by Labels. Nature Climate Change, 9(1), 53–58. https://doi.org/10.1038/s41558-018-0354-z
European Commission. (2023). Amending Directives 2005/29/EC and 2011/83/EU as Regards Empowering Consumers for the Green Transition Through Better Protection Against Unfair Practices and Better Information.
Garnett, T. (2013). Food Sustainability: Problems, Perspectives and Solutions. The Proceedings of the Nutrition Society, 72(1), 29–39. https://doi.org/10.1017/S0029665112002947
Grunert, K. G., Hieke, S., & Wills, J. (2013). Sustainability Labels on Food Products: Consumer Motivation, Understanding and Use. Food Policy, 44, 177–189. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.foodpol.2013.12.001
Hartmann, C., Lazzarini, G., Funk, A., & Siegrist, M. (2021). Measuring Consumers’ Knowledge of the Environmental Impact of Foods. Appetite, 167, 105622. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.appet.2021.105622
Hayes, A. F. (2018). Introduction to Mediation, Moderation, and Conditional Process Analysis: A Regression-Based Approach (Methodology in the Social Sciences) (2nd ed.). New York, NY: The Guilford Press
Thøgersen, J., Haugaard, P., & Olesen, A. (2010). Consumer responses to ecolabels. European Journal of Marketing, 44(11/12), 1787–1810. https://doi.org/10.1108/03090561011079882
Torma, G., & Thøgersen, J. (2023). Can a meta sustainability label facilitate more sustainable consumer choices? Business Strategy and the Environment. https://doi.org/10.1002/bse.3488
