Sustainable food labeling scheme

With increased consumer interest in sustainability, sustainability labels and claims are springing up like mushrooms. But the proliferation does not exactly make things easier for consumers, and companies are also asking for more clarity. So there is a need for a labeling scheme from the European Union. In this article the latest state of affairs.

One of the key aspects of the European Green Deal is the "farm to fork" strategy. The goal of this strategy is to transform the food system in the European Union (EU) to achieve climate neutrality by 2050. To achieve this, both demand and supply of sustainable food will have to increase. This is a challenge for both business and consumers. This has also created the need for regulation and standardization to create a level playing field. To support the European Commission in developing a labeling scheme for sustainable food, the European Economic and Social Committee (EESC) issued an own-initiative opinion.

Simple, practical and scientifically based

In general, the EESC recommends creating regulations that are as simple and usable as possible, transparent and scientifically based. The goal here is not to divide products into right and wrong. Rather, regulations should give food producers insight into the status of their products so that they can make them more sustainable. At the same time, consumers should be able to make more conscious choices. Initially, sustainability labeling should be voluntary, but binding conditions are imposed. If a label does not meet these conditions, its use is prohibited.

Definition of sustainable

Essential to the scheme is a harmonized understanding of the term "sustainability. The EESC argues that we should stick to the general definition of sustainability. In it, the ecological, economic and social dimensions all play equally important roles. How do these pillars translate into labeling? For ecological you can think of a statement such as "less deforestation" on a product without palm oil, for social you can think of "good for humans and animals" on eggs from a care farm and for economic you can think of "on the way to a livable income" on a fair trade coffee packaging. According to this holistic interpretation of the concept of sustainability, packaging that focuses only on one or two of these aspects is by definition inadequate. Thus, these should not carry the umbrella term "sustainable.

Stoplight system

Rating scales are already familiar from other logos, such as the Nutri-Score. The Committee believes that this type of system can be useful in a sustainability labeling scheme and specifically recommends it. For example, it can help consumers in their purchasing decisions and encourage companies to make their products more sustainable. What is important here is that the assessment criteria on which the scores are based are scientifically based and sufficiently transparent to consumers.

Use existing schemes

The Committee recognizes the importance of existing quality schemes, such as those for organic farming and geographical indications (PDO, PGI and TSG). These schemes already contain elements consistent with making the food chain more sustainable. For example, organic agriculture producers use less pesticides and fertilizers, and products with protected origins can bring more money to poorer areas. To take these schemes even further, they need to be tested for sustainability and possibly supplemented with further sustainability provisions.

Educating consumers

Consumers also play a crucial role in the EESC opinion. This is because they can direct production with their demand. The EESC is aware that sustainability labeling appeals mainly to consumers who are already interested in sustainable food. They can serve as an example for consumers who are not yet as engaged in this. The EESC recommends educating the latter group so that they are both willing and able to make more sustainable choices based on labeling.

Points of interest

Finally, a few points to consider when creating a regulation around sustainability labeling. For example, it is important that regulations focus primarily on larger producers. For small producers, such as farm stores, legislation will be less necessary because they already experience more social pressure to produce sustainably. In addition, the design of the scheme must also take into account cultural and geographical differences between countries, and allow for national legislation. This does complicate the system. Especially in economic and social terms, there are major differences between EU countries. Unambiguous requirements for minimum wages for food industry employees, for example, would be difficult to establish. Another example is the fact that different countries have different ideas about what is required for a high standard of animal welfare.

How to move forward?

Plenty of food for thought, then. The European Commission will take this advice into account when designing the final legislative proposal. Other parties may also be called in to conduct research and gather advice. Then the member states can still have their say on the draft of the bill. So all in all, it will certainly take some time before there is a new labeling scheme for sustainable food, but the first start is there.