IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/p/tin/wpaper/20240024.html
   My bibliography  Save this paper

Learning the value of Eco-Labels: The role of information in sustainable decisions

Author

Listed:
  • Alejandro Hirmas

    (University of Amsterdam)

  • Jan B. Engelmann

    (University of Amsterdam)

Abstract

Sustainability ratings help consumers understand the environmental impact of their purchases. Such ratings have increased the consumers’ sustainable choices in the electrodomestics and housing markets. In the particular case of energy labels, sustainable products are also associated with private benefits due to future cost reductions in energy expenditure. These results question the potential effectiveness of sustainability ratings for other products, such as food, where the link between environmental and private benefits is less clear. In two incentivized experiments (N=749), we study how consumers use sustainability ratings when these ratings are dissociated from private benefit, i.e. product quality. Participants chose between two products based on their quality and sustainability, which were presented in separate rating scales, alongside the products’ prices. Furthermore, we study how consumers integrate the usage of ratings with other information provided from other sources. Halfway through the experiment, we provide information regarding the underlying value behind the ratings. Using a between-subject design, we modify the information provided and analyze the impact of such information on the participants’ subsequent choices. Our findings indicate that even when sustainability ratings are not connected to the products’ quality, participants make use of them to decide which products to buy. We also find that participants underreact to new information, and make inefficient choices based on their decisions from before. Moreover, to track the participants’ attention and analyze potential heterogeneous usage of the information we use process-tracing methods. We find that participants show highly heterogeneous attention patterns, which are linked to differential weighting of the product’s attributes (price, quality, and sustainability) during the decision. While our information treatment has little effect on attention allocation to individual attributes, participants correctly recall the information at the end of the experiment. These results suggest that participants partially neglect new information, and anchor to their initial decision rules formed before the information treatments.

Suggested Citation

  • Alejandro Hirmas & Jan B. Engelmann, 2024. "Learning the value of Eco-Labels: The role of information in sustainable decisions," Tinbergen Institute Discussion Papers 24-024/I, Tinbergen Institute.
  • Handle: RePEc:tin:wpaper:20240024
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://papers.tinbergen.nl/24024.pdf
    Download Restriction: no
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Geoffrey Fisher, 2021. "Intertemporal Choices Are Causally Influenced by Fluctuations in Visual Attention," Management Science, INFORMS, vol. 67(8), pages 4961-4981, August.
    2. Adrian R. Camilleri & Richard P. Larrick & Shajuti Hossain & Dalia Patino-Echeverri, 2019. "Consumers underestimate the emissions associated with food but are aided by labels," Nature Climate Change, Nature, vol. 9(1), pages 53-58, January.
    3. Paolo Crosetto & Laurent Muller & Bernard Ruffieux, 2024. "Label or taxes: why not both? Testing nutritional mixed policies in the lab," Working Papers 2024-01, Grenoble Applied Economics Laboratory (GAEL).
    4. Hunt Allcott & Dmitry Taubinsky, 2015. "Evaluating Behaviorally Motivated Policy: Experimental Evidence from the Lightbulb Market," American Economic Review, American Economic Association, vol. 105(8), pages 2501-2538, August.
    5. Filip Matêjka & Alisdair McKay, 2015. "Rational Inattention to Discrete Choices: A New Foundation for the Multinomial Logit Model," American Economic Review, American Economic Association, vol. 105(1), pages 272-298, January.
    6. Jannis Engel & Nora Szech, 2020. "A little good is good enough: Ethical consumption, cheap excuses, and moral self-licensing," PLOS ONE, Public Library of Science, vol. 15(1), pages 1-19, January.
    7. Aaron J. Staples & Carson J. Reeling & Nicole J. Olynk Widmar & Jayson L. Lusk, 2020. "Consumer willingness to pay for sustainability attributes in beer: A choice experiment using eco‐labels," Agribusiness, John Wiley & Sons, Ltd., vol. 36(4), pages 591-612, October.
    8. Pedro Bordalo & Nicola Gennaioli & Andrei Shleifer, 2013. "Salience and Consumer Choice," Journal of Political Economy, University of Chicago Press, vol. 121(5), pages 803-843.
    9. Raj Chetty & Adam Looney & Kory Kroft, 2009. "Salience and Taxation: Theory and Evidence," American Economic Review, American Economic Association, vol. 99(4), pages 1145-1177, September.
    10. Carlos Alós-Ferrer & Alexander Ritschel, 2022. "Attention and salience in preference reversals," Experimental Economics, Springer;Economic Science Association, vol. 25(3), pages 1024-1051, June.
    11. Sigurdsson, Valdimar & Larsen, Nils Magne & Pálsdóttir, Rakel Gyða & Folwarczny, Michal & Menon, R.G. Vishnu & Fagerstrøm, Asle, 2022. "Increasing the effectiveness of ecological food signaling: Comparing sustainability tags with eco-labels," Journal of Business Research, Elsevier, vol. 139(C), pages 1099-1110.
    12. Van Loo, Ellen J. & Caputo, Vincenzina & Nayga, Rodolfo M. & Seo, Han-Seok & Zhang, Baoyue & Verbeke, Wim, 2015. "Sustainability labels on coffee: Consumer preferences, willingness-to-pay and visual attention to attributes," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 118(C), pages 215-225.
    13. Sims, Christopher A., 2003. "Implications of rational inattention," Journal of Monetary Economics, Elsevier, vol. 50(3), pages 665-690, April.
    14. Stadelmann, Marcel & Schubert, Renate, 2018. "How Do Different Designs of Energy Labels Influence Purchases of Household Appliances? A Field Study in Switzerland," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 144(C), pages 112-123.
    15. Xiaomin Li & Colin F Camerer, 2022. "Predictable Effects of Visual Salience in Experimental Decisions and Games," The Quarterly Journal of Economics, President and Fellows of Harvard College, vol. 137(3), pages 1849-1900.
    16. Nano Barahona & Cristóbal Otero & Sebastián Otero, 2023. "Equilibrium Effects of Food Labeling Policies," Econometrica, Econometric Society, vol. 91(3), pages 839-868, May.
    17. Davide Pace & Joël van der Weele, 2020. "Curbing Carbon: An Experiment on Uncertainty and Information about CO2 emissions," Tinbergen Institute Discussion Papers 20-059/I, Tinbergen Institute.
    18. Meißner, Martin & Oppewal, Harmen & Huber, Joel, 2020. "Surprising adaptivity to set size changes in multi-attribute repeated choice tasks," Journal of Business Research, Elsevier, vol. 111(C), pages 163-175.
    19. Vlaeminck, Pieter & Jiang, Ting & Vranken, Liesbet, 2014. "Food labeling and eco-friendly consumption: Experimental evidence from a Belgian supermarket," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 108(C), pages 180-190.
    20. Khazal, Aras & Sønstebø, Ole Jakob, 2020. "Valuation of energy performance certificates in the rental market – Professionals vs. nonprofessionals," Energy Policy, Elsevier, vol. 147(C).
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    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. Xavier Gabaix, 2017. "Behavioral Inattention," NBER Working Papers 24096, National Bureau of Economic Research, Inc.
    2. George Loewenstein & Zachary Wojtowicz, 2023. "The Economics of Attention," CESifo Working Paper Series 10712, CESifo.
    3. Andreas Hefti & Peiyao Shen & King King Li, 2021. "Igniting deliberation in high stake decisions: a field study," ECON - Working Papers 378, Department of Economics - University of Zurich.
    4. Dewan, Ambuj & Neligh, Nathaniel, 2020. "Estimating information cost functions in models of rational inattention," Journal of Economic Theory, Elsevier, vol. 187(C).
    5. Pedro Bordalo & John Conlon & Nicola Gennaioli & Spencer Kwon & Andrei Shleifer, 2023. "How People Use Statistics," Working Papers 699, IGIER (Innocenzo Gasparini Institute for Economic Research), Bocconi University.
    6. Persson, Petra, 2018. "Attention manipulation and information overload," Behavioural Public Policy, Cambridge University Press, vol. 2(1), pages 78-106, May.
    7. Brocas, Isabelle & Carrillo, Juan D., 2021. "Value computation and modulation: A neuroeconomic theory of self-control as constrained optimization," Journal of Economic Theory, Elsevier, vol. 198(C).
    8. Michael Grubb, 2015. "Failing to Choose the Best Price: Theory, Evidence, and Policy," Review of Industrial Organization, Springer;The Industrial Organization Society, vol. 47(3), pages 303-340, November.
    9. Emmanuel Farhi & Xavier Gabaix, 2020. "Optimal Taxation with Behavioral Agents," American Economic Review, American Economic Association, vol. 110(1), pages 298-336, January.
    10. Hu, Shiyang & Xiang, Cheng & Quan, Xiaofeng, 2023. "Salience theory and mutual fund flows: Empirical evidence from China," Emerging Markets Review, Elsevier, vol. 54(C).
    11. Scott R. Baker & Stephanie Johnson & Lorenz Kueng, 2021. "Shopping for Lower Sales Tax Rates," American Economic Journal: Macroeconomics, American Economic Association, vol. 13(3), pages 209-250, July.
    12. Erin T. Bronchetti & Judd B. Kessler & Ellen B. Magenheim & Dmitry Taubinsky & Eric Zwick, 2023. "Is Attention Produced Optimally? Theory and Evidence From Experiments With Bandwidth Enhancements," Econometrica, Econometric Society, vol. 91(2), pages 669-707, March.
    13. Andrew Caplin & Mark Dean & John Leahy, 2022. "Rationally Inattentive Behavior: Characterizing and Generalizing Shannon Entropy," Journal of Political Economy, University of Chicago Press, vol. 130(6), pages 1676-1715.
    14. Lunn, Pete & Somerville, Jason J., 2015. "Surplus Identification with Non-Linear Returns," Papers WP522, Economic and Social Research Institute (ESRI).
    15. Dominik Naeher, 2022. "Technology Adoption Under Costly Information Processing," International Economic Review, Department of Economics, University of Pennsylvania and Osaka University Institute of Social and Economic Research Association, vol. 63(2), pages 699-753, May.
    16. Aysegul Kanay & Denis Hilton & Laetitia Charalambides & Jean-Baptiste Corrégé & Eva Inaudi & Laurent Waroquier & Stéphane Cézéra, 2021. "Making the carbon basket count: Goal setting promotes sustainable consumption in a simulated online supermarket," Post-Print hal-03403040, HAL.
    17. Bansal, Prateek & Kim, Eui-Jin & Ozdemir, Semra, 2024. "Discrete choice experiments with eye-tracking: How far we have come and ways forward," Journal of choice modelling, Elsevier, vol. 51(C).
    18. Heidhues, Paul & Köszegi, Botond, 2018. "Behavioral Industrial Organization," CEPR Discussion Papers 12988, C.E.P.R. Discussion Papers.
    19. Giovanna d’Adda & Yu Gao & Massimo Tavoni, 2022. "A randomized trial of energy cost information provision alongside energy-efficiency classes for refrigerator purchases," Nature Energy, Nature, vol. 7(4), pages 360-368, April.
    20. Nicolas de Roos & Vladimir Smirnov, 2020. "Collusion with intertemporal price dispersion," RAND Journal of Economics, RAND Corporation, vol. 51(1), pages 158-188, March.

    More about this item

    Keywords

    Attention; Sustainability ratings; conjoint analysis; information treatments; Mouselab;
    All these keywords.

    JEL classification:

    • D81 - Microeconomics - - Information, Knowledge, and Uncertainty - - - Criteria for Decision-Making under Risk and Uncertainty
    • D83 - Microeconomics - - Information, Knowledge, and Uncertainty - - - Search; Learning; Information and Knowledge; Communication; Belief; Unawareness
    • D87 - Microeconomics - - Information, Knowledge, and Uncertainty - - - Neuroeconomics
    • D91 - Microeconomics - - Micro-Based Behavioral Economics - - - Role and Effects of Psychological, Emotional, Social, and Cognitive Factors on Decision Making

    NEP fields

    This paper has been announced in the following NEP Reports:

    Statistics

    Access and download statistics

    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:tin:wpaper:20240024. 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: Tinbergen Office +31 (0)10-4088900 (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://edirc.repec.org/data/tinbenl.html .

    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.