IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/gam/jsusta/v13y2021i2p933-d482355.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

A Multi-Stakeholder Perspective on Food Labelling for Environmental Sustainability: Attitudes, Perceived Barriers, and Solution Approaches towards the “Traffic Light Index”

Author

Listed:
  • Nathalie Gröfke

    (Sustainability Strategy at Accenture GmbH, 10117 Berlin, Germany)

  • Valérie Duplat

    (School of Business and Economics, Vrije Universiteit Amsterdam, 1081 HV Amsterdam, The Netherlands)

  • Christopher Wickert

    (School of Business and Economics, Vrije Universiteit Amsterdam, 1081 HV Amsterdam, The Netherlands)

  • Brian Tjemkes

    (School of Business and Economics, Vrije Universiteit Amsterdam, 1081 HV Amsterdam, The Netherlands)

Abstract

The so-called “Traffic Light Index” (TLI) is a meta-sustainability label aimed at condensing the information provided by existing sustainability labels into an overarching message on food products’ environmental footprints. Such an overarching message is critical to reduce the confusion caused by existing labels and to foster more sustainable dietary habits among consumers. While research shows that the TLI is a viable and effective choice, its actual development and implementation are impeded by debates between relevant stakeholders in the European food system. This study examines those debates and adopts a multi-stakeholder perspective to address the following question: How do different stakeholder groups involved in the discussion towards a meta-sustainability label inhibit the adoption of the TLI label? Exploratory interviews with representatives from non-governmental organizations, social enterprises, academia, multi-national corporations, and governmental organizations show that each stakeholder group (1) adopts either optimistic or skeptical attitudes towards the TLI label, (2) perceives different types and magnitudes of barriers to its adoption (i.e., cognitive, methodological, and processual), and (3) proposes solutions to overcome those barriers that are either of an entrepreneurial or risk-averse nature. Findings further reveal that multi-stakeholder interactions influence attitudes and thereby inhibit or favor TLI adoption. Hence, entrepreneurial (vs. risk-averse) solutions proposed by optimistic (vs. skeptical) stakeholders may alter the attitudes of skeptical (vs. optimistic) stakeholders and the barriers they perceive to TLI adoption. By responding to calls for holistic approaches towards food labelling, our study shows how the diversity of stakeholders’ perceptions towards the TLI inhibits its adoption. We propose a theoretical framework and a set of propositions that can serve as springboards for policy ideas to propel progress in food labelling for environmental sustainability.

Suggested Citation

  • 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.
    • Handle: RePEc:gam:jsusta:v:13:y:2021:i:2:p:933-:d:482355
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://www.mdpi.com/2071-1050/13/2/933/pdf
    Download Restriction: no
    File URL: https://www.mdpi.com/2071-1050/13/2/933/
    Download Restriction: no
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Mamouni Limnios, Elena Alexandra & Ghadouani, Anas & Schilizzi, Steven G.M. & Mazzarol, Tim, 2009. "Giving the consumer the choice: A methodology for Product Ecological Footprint calculation," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 68(10), pages 2525-2534, August.
    2. Cristina Nãftanãilã & Odi Mihaela Zãrnescu & Laurentia Avram & Viorica Braga & Robert Dragomir & Elena Gurgu, 2019. "Determining Romania's Position in Europe According to the Optimized Global Food Security Index in 2018," The AMFITEATRU ECONOMIC journal, Academy of Economic Studies - Bucharest, Romania, vol. 21(51), pages 294-294.
    3. 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.
    4. Porter, Constance Elise & Donthu, Naveen, 2006. "Using the technology acceptance model to explain how attitudes determine Internet usage: The role of perceived access barriers and demographics," Journal of Business Research, Elsevier, vol. 59(9), pages 999-1007, September.
    5. Garnett, Tara, 2011. "Where are the best opportunities for reducing greenhouse gas emissions in the food system (including the food chain)?," Food Policy, Elsevier, vol. 36(S1), pages 23-32.
    6. Palich, Leslie E. & Ray Bagby, D., 1995. "Using cognitive theory to explain entrepreneurial risk-taking: Challenging conventional wisdom," Journal of Business Venturing, Elsevier, vol. 10(6), pages 425-438, November.
    7. Sharp, Anne & Wheeler, Meagan, 2013. "Reducing householders’ grocery carbon emissions: Carbon literacy and carbon label preferences," Australasian marketing journal, Elsevier, vol. 21(4), pages 240-249.
    8. repec:aud:audfin:v:21:y:2019:i:51:p:294 is not listed on IDEAS
    9. Marco Springmann & Daniel Mason-D’Croz & Sherman Robinson & Keith Wiebe & H. Charles J. Godfray & Mike Rayner & Peter Scarborough, 2017. "Mitigation potential and global health impacts from emissions pricing of food commodities," Nature Climate Change, Nature, vol. 7(1), pages 69-74, January.
    10. Nikolay Minkov & Vanessa Bach & Matthias Finkbeiner, 2018. "Characterization of the Cradle to Cradle Certified™ Products Program in the Context of Eco-labels and Environmental Declarations," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 10(3), pages 1-20, March.
    11. Alexis Gutierrez & Thomas F. Thornton, 2014. "Can Consumers Understand Sustainability through Seafood Eco-Labels? A U.S. and UK Case Study," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 6(11), pages 1-23, November.
    12. Mihai Andronie & Violeta-Elena Simion & Elena Gurgu & Adrian Dijmãrescu & Irina Dijmãrescu, 2019. "Social Responsibility of Firms and the Impact of Bio-Economy in Intelligent Use of Renewable Energy Source," The AMFITEATRU ECONOMIC journal, Academy of Economic Studies - Bucharest, Romania, vol. 21(52), pages 520-520, August.
    13. Leach, Allison M. & Emery, Kyle A. & Gephart, Jessica & Davis, Kyle F. & Erisman, Jan Willem & Leip, Adrian & Pace, Michael L. & D’Odorico, Paolo & Carr, Joel & Noll, Laura Cattell & Castner, Elizabet, 2016. "Environmental impact food labels combining carbon, nitrogen, and water footprints," Food Policy, Elsevier, vol. 61(C), pages 213-223.
    14. Joop de Boer, 2003. "Sustainability labelling schemes: the logic of their claims and their functions for stakeholders," Business Strategy and the Environment, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 12(4), pages 254-264, July.
    15. 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.
    16. Peschel, Anne & Grebitus, Carola & Steiner, Bodo & Veeman, Michele, 2016. "How does consumer knowledge affect environmentally sustainable choices? Evidence from a cross-country latent class analysis of food labels," MPRA Paper 69864, University Library of Munich, Germany.
    17. Duane Windsor, 2010. "The Role of Dynamics in Stakeholder Thinking," Journal of Business Ethics, Springer, vol. 96(1), pages 79-87, August.
    18. Garnett, Tara, 2011. "Where are the best opportunities for reducing greenhouse gas emissions in the food system (including the food chain)?," Food Policy, Elsevier, vol. 36(Supplemen), pages 23-32, January.
    19. Frieder Rubik & Paolo Frankl & Lucia Pietroni & Dirk Scheer, 2007. "Eco-labelling and consumers: towards a re-focus and integrated approaches," International Journal of Innovation and Sustainable Development, Inderscience Enterprises Ltd, vol. 2(2), pages 175-191.
    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. Noelia Salido-Andres & Nuria Garcia-Rodriguez & Silvia Cachero-Martinez, 2022. "Connecting Social Enterprises and Sustainable Consumption: Systematic Review, Bibliometric Analysis, and Conceptual Framework," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 14(20), pages 1-20, October.

    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. Oriana Gava & Fabio Bartolini & Francesca Venturi & Gianluca Brunori & Angela Zinnai & Alberto Pardossi, 2018. "A Reflection of the Use of the Life Cycle Assessment Tool for Agri-Food Sustainability," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 11(1), pages 1-16, December.
    2. Oriana Gava & Fabio Bartolini & Francesca Venturi & Gianluca Brunori & Alberto Pardossi, 2020. "Improving Policy Evidence Base for Agricultural Sustainability and Food Security: A Content Analysis of Life Cycle Assessment Research," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 12(3), pages 1-29, February.
    3. Van Loo, Ellen J. & Hoefkens, Christine & Verbeke, Wim, 2017. "Healthy, sustainable and plant-based eating: Perceived (mis)match and involvement-based consumer segments as targets for future policy," Food Policy, Elsevier, vol. 69(C), pages 46-57.
    4. Bonnet, Céline & Bouamra-Mechemache, Zohra & Réquillart, Vincent & Treich, Nicolas, 2020. "Viewpoint: Regulating meat consumption to improve health, the environment and animal welfare," Food Policy, Elsevier, vol. 97(C).
    5. Vázquez-Rowe, Ian & Villanueva-Rey, Pedro & Moreira, Mª Teresa & Feijoo, Gumersindo, 2013. "The role of consumer purchase and post-purchase decision-making in sustainable seafood consumption. A Spanish case study using carbon footprinting," Food Policy, Elsevier, vol. 41(C), pages 94-102.
    6. Li, Xiaogu & Jensen, Kimberly L. & Clark, Christopher D. & Lambert, Dayton M., 2016. "Consumer willingness to pay for beef grown using climate friendly production practices," Food Policy, Elsevier, vol. 64(C), pages 93-106.
    7. Alexander J. Stein & Marcelo Lima, 2022. "Sustainable food labelling: considerations for policy-makers," Review of Agricultural, Food and Environmental Studies, Springer, vol. 103(2), pages 143-160, June.
    8. Liu, Tiantian & Wang, Qunwei & Su, Bin, 2016. "A review of carbon labeling: Standards, implementation, and impact," Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews, Elsevier, vol. 53(C), pages 68-79.
    9. 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.
    10. Hunter, Erik & Röös, Elin, 2016. "Fear of climate change consequences and predictors of intentions to alter meat consumption," Food Policy, Elsevier, vol. 62(C), pages 151-160.
    11. Maurizio Canavari & Silvia Coderoni, 2020. "Consumer stated preferences for dairy products with carbon footprint labels in Italy," Agricultural and Food Economics, Springer;Italian Society of Agricultural Economics (SIDEA), vol. 8(1), pages 1-16, December.
    12. Natalie Doran-Browne & Richard Eckard & Ralph Behrendt & Ross Kingwell, 2015. "Nutrient density as a metric for comparing greenhouse gas emissions from food production," Climatic Change, Springer, vol. 129(1), pages 73-87, March.
    13. Torbjörn Jansson & Sarah Säll, 2018. "Environmental Consumption Taxes On Animal Food Products To Mitigate Greenhouse Gas Emissions From The European Union," Climate Change Economics (CCE), World Scientific Publishing Co. Pte. Ltd., vol. 9(04), pages 1-16, November.
    14. Dorward, Leejiah J., 2012. "Where are the best opportunities for reducing greenhouse gas emissions in the food system (including the food chain)? A comment," Food Policy, Elsevier, vol. 37(4), pages 463-466.
    15. Yue, Shen & Munir, Irfan Ullah & Hyder, Shabir & Nassani, Abdelmohsen A. & Qazi Abro, Muhammad Moinuddin & Zaman, Khalid, 2020. "Sustainable food production, forest biodiversity and mineral pricing: Interconnected global issues," Resources Policy, Elsevier, vol. 65(C).
    16. Cristiano Codagnone & Giuseppe Alessandro Veltri & Francesco Bogliacino & Francisco Lupiáñez-Villanueva & George Gaskell & Andriy Ivchenko & Pietro Ortoleva & Francesco Mureddu, 2016. "Labels as nudges? An experimental study of car eco-labels," Economia Politica: Journal of Analytical and Institutional Economics, Springer;Fondazione Edison, vol. 33(3), pages 403-432, December.
    17. Maiyar, Lohithaksha M & Thakkar, Jitesh J, 2019. "Environmentally conscious logistics planning for food grain industry considering wastages employing multi objective hybrid particle swarm optimization," Transportation Research Part E: Logistics and Transportation Review, Elsevier, vol. 127(C), pages 220-248.
    18. Danilo Bertoni & Daniele Cavicchioli & Franco Donzelli & Giovanni Ferrazzi & Dario G. Frisio & Roberto Pretolani & Elena Claire Ricci & Vera Ventura, 2018. "Recent Contributions of Agricultural Economics Research in the Field of Sustainable Development," Agriculture, MDPI, vol. 8(12), pages 1-20, December.
    19. Ujué Fresán & Maximino Alfredo Mejia & Winston J Craig & Karen Jaceldo-Siegl & Joan Sabaté, 2019. "Meat Analogs from Different Protein Sources: A Comparison of Their Sustainability and Nutritional Content," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 11(12), pages 1-10, June.
    20. Morena Bruno & Marianne Thomsen & Federico Maria Pulselli & Nicoletta Patrizi & Michele Marini & Dario Caro, 2019. "The carbon footprint of Danish diets," Climatic Change, Springer, vol. 156(4), pages 489-507, October.

    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:13:y:2021:i:2:p:933-:d:482355. 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.