blogger

A Marketer's Lens By Danette Amstein
Danette Amstein is a managing principal for Midan Marketing - a full-service agency that solely focuses on supporting the meat industry.

Carbon footprint: The on-pack label you didn’t know you needed

(The views and opinions expressed in this blog are strictly those of the author.)

Sustainability. Ask 10 consumers to define "sustainability" for the meat they buy and you will get 10 different answers. Yet, all major processors and most retailers and foodservice operators have set goals for it, establishing future finish lines where they can proudly proclaim they have accomplished what they set out to do.

A review of those sustainability goals suggests that future messaging will revolve around water, climate and/or energy use with a timeline of 2030 and beyond for the victory parties.

Based on these goals we should expect to start seeing more consumer messaging around sustainability. The hard part is figuring out how to boil down such a complex topic into easy-to-understand nuggets.

The European Union is well ahead of the U.S. when it comes to talking about sustainability — they have been doing it for nearly a decade. The most common on-pack message is climate-focused, with an emphasis on carbon.

Carbon labeling is how many companies and brands are communicating progress toward their stated sustainability goals. It started in 2008 with Tesco supermarkets, which eventually discontinued the effort because other retailers didn’t join in. But that changed around 2012 with a plethora of carbon labeling options. A 2013 study conducted for the European Commission, Directorate-General for Environment showed 48% of European consumers found the environmental labels unclear. A 2019 study noted that 67% wanted a standard label.

From my research (albeit not exhaustive), it appears the most popular labeling is from the Carbon Trust, a third-party organization that has made carbon footprint analysis its priority. The Trust introduced the footprint logo in 2007; it has undergone multiple iterations since.  (To see how it is being used, click here.)

Is the use of the Carbon Trust messaging or something like it helpful for the meat industry in the U.S.? I think so. We are entering a time where not talking about our carbon footprint could be extremely detrimental. Why? Because no messaging could quickly become a signal to environmentally conscious consumers that your company and products are not focused on addressing this issue.

Research is also showing that even for consumers who are not focused on environmental claims, seeing them on package does, in fact, change behavior.

The University of Copenhagen and the Swedish University of Agricultural Sciences recently completed a study to understand the impact climate effect information can have on influencing consumer choice. The study was done on meat products. Two groups emerged in the study: those who wanted to know the climate information and those who didn’t, aka “information avoiders.” They found that of those who wanted to be informed, 32% made a different product choice based on the information. As for those who were not seeking the information, 12% of them changed their behavior too, when presented with it.

As a marketer, these numbers get my attention.

Meat consumers will continue to want to know more about the sustainability of our products. We must be ready to respond or risk losing their confidence. What fuels this comment? Well, one reason is the fact that alt-protein companies are using carbon labeling to differentiate their products. Here is an example from the UK:   

Look closely at the carbon/kilogram of beef mince (ground beef), chicken breasts and the meat substitute Quorn-branded mince product. If a consumer is concerned about carbon, Quorn makes a strong case as to why their product should be chosen.

All this leads me down a winding path of questions and concerns. For example, what data was Quorn using? I haven’t had a chance to fully explore this yet but plan to do so soon. Regardless of what my research finds, I do know this: Alt-proteins and others want to paint the worst picture possible of the meat industry and are using carbon labeling to help build their case.

To rectify this, we need to collect new data (authenticated by a third party) so we can raise the tide for the entire industry with new and improved averages. The meat industry should receive credit for the hard work we have already done and the strides we are making now to further reduce our carbon footprint. Carbon labeling on meat packages is a key step in making that happen.

5/19/2021

 
Loading Comments