Abstract
This randomised online experiment aimed to investigate how eco-labelling and social nudging influenced sustainable food choice, as well as consider the effect of motivation to act sustainably. Participants were UK adults ≥18 years (n = 1399). Participants were asked to choose a hypothetical meal (beef, chicken or vegetarian burrito) and were randomly allocated to one of three conditions varying in labelling: eco-labelling; social nudge or control (no label). Co-primary outcomes were the frequency that the vegetarian and chicken burritos were chosen (i.e., the more sustainable food choices). There was evidence that more vegetarian (OR = 3.3 [95% CI 2.0, 5.3]) and chicken (OR = 2.5 [95% CI 1.8, 3.4]) burrito choices were made in the eco-label condition, over the beef burrito, compared to the control condition. In the social nudge condition, there was evidence that participants chose a vegetarian burrito over a beef burrito (OR = 1.7 [95% CI 1.1, 2.7]), but not a vegetarian burrito over a chicken burrito (OR = 1.4 [95% CI 0.9, 2.2]). Although both labels were effective at promoting participants to make more sustainable food choices, the eco-label was the most effective. Choice of burrito was modified by motivation to act sustainably across all conditions. This study suggests that future policy could include eco-labelling and/or a social nudge to reduce meat consumption and meet global climate change targets.
Generated Summary
This randomized online experiment investigated the impact of eco-labelling and social nudging on sustainable food choices, considering the role of motivation. The study employed a between-subjects, parallel-group online experiment where UK adults were asked to choose a hypothetical meal (beef, chicken, or vegetarian burrito). Participants were randomly assigned to one of three conditions: eco-labelling, social nudge, or a control condition (no label). The primary outcomes were the frequency of vegetarian and chicken burritos chosen, representing more sustainable choices. The study aimed to understand how these interventions influence food choices and whether motivation to act sustainably moderates their effectiveness.
Key Findings & Statistics
- The study included 1399 participants.
- The mean age of participants was 38 years (SD = 12.8), with 50% being female.
- 90% of participants identified as white ethnicity, and 59% reported having a higher education level.
- High levels of support for introducing eco-labels (90%) were reported, with a reduced number supporting social nudges (53%).
- Results from a 3×3 Chi-squared test showed a significant difference between the three study conditions (x²[4] = 40.157, p < 0.001).
- The choice of a beef burrito was highest in the control condition (33%) and lower in the social nudge (29%) and eco-label (16%) conditions.
- The choice of a vegetarian burrito was highest in the eco-label condition (14%), followed by the social nudge condition (13%) and lowest in the control condition (9%).
- Compared to the control condition, participants in the eco-label condition had higher odds of choosing a vegetarian (OR = 3.3 [95% CI 2.0, 5.3], p < 0.001) or chicken burrito (OR = 2.5 [95% CI 1.8, 3.4], p < 0.001).
- In the social nudge condition, there was evidence that participants chose a vegetarian burrito over a beef burrito (OR = 1.7 [95% CI 1.1, 2.7], p = 0.023), but not a chicken burrito (p = 0.099).
- Participants in the eco-label condition had approximately twice the odds of choosing a vegetarian burrito (OR = 1.9 [95% CI 1.2, 3.0], p = 0.004) or chicken burrito (OR = 2.0 [95% CI 1.5, 2.9], p < 0.001), over a beef burrito.
- Participants in the eco-label condition had decreased odds of choosing a beef burrito over a chicken burrito compared to the social nudge condition (OR = 0.5 [95% CI 0.3, 0.7], p < 0.001).
- The mean motivation to act sustainably score was 3.3 (SD = 0.8).
- When the main effect of motivation to act sustainably was added to the model, the choice of a vegetarian burrito over a chicken or beef burrito was modified by motivation to act sustainably across all study conditions.
- There was a stronger reaction to the social nudge label (mean reactance score of 2.81 [SD = 0.88]) compared to the eco-label (mean reactance score of 2.44 [SD = 0.85]) (t [1396] = 16.2, MD = 0.36 [85% CI 0.32, 0.40], p < 0.001).
Other Important Findings
- In the eco-label condition, participants had approximately twice the odds of choosing a vegetarian burrito or chicken burrito over a beef burrito.
- The choice of burrito was modified by motivation to act sustainably across all study conditions, with the interaction effect most predominant in the eco-label condition.
- The eco-label was more effective in promoting sustainable food choices compared to the social nudge.
- Participants showed higher levels of support for the eco-label (90%) than the social nudge.
Limitations Noted in the Document
- The study’s sample had a slightly elevated representation of adults with a university degree or higher compared to the UK population.
- The social nudge label was not directly related to the actual popularity of the burritos, which could have led to a stronger negative reaction.
- The study’s findings regarding the relationship between motivation to act sustainably and meal choice should be interpreted with caution, as motivation was assessed after meal selection.
- The online setting might not fully translate to real-world food choices due to uncontrolled environmental factors.
- Social desirability bias could have influenced results, with participants potentially choosing options they believed were expected or more environmentally friendly.
- The lack of monetary exchange may not reflect real-world scenarios, and the consistency of the price of each burrito could be a limitation.
Conclusion
The study’s findings indicate that both eco-labelling and social nudges can effectively encourage more sustainable food choices. The eco-label proved to be the more impactful of the two, leading to a greater selection of vegetarian and chicken burritos over beef. This was especially true for participants who already expressed a higher motivation to act sustainably. The study highlights that as awareness of climate change and the impact of individual food choices grows, the influence of eco-labels could further increase, driving more sustainable behaviors. However, it’s important to acknowledge that the study has limitations, including the hypothetical nature of the online setting and the potential for social desirability bias. Furthermore, the study’s results warrant replication in real-world scenarios to confirm these findings. The success of the eco-label could depend on the consumer’s ability to compare products and their associated environmental impacts. The research suggests that mandatory eco-labels, using a grading system, could not only facilitate comparisons but also lead to lower negative reactance compared to social nudges, and garner strong public support. Future research might explore the virtuous cycle between eco-labels and increased motivation to act sustainably, and could also consider alternative nudge strategies.