Labels Alone Cannot Mainstream Sustainable Consumption

14 Nov 2011 – Luke Upchurch

Labelling has an important role to play in conveying information about sustainability to consumers, but it is by no means a panacea for all the ills of unsustainable consumption. Consumer awareness does not simply equate to consumer action; it must be accompanied by incentives, disincentives and, crucially, the phasing out of products and services that have the greatest impact.

This logic does not only apply to the issue of sustainability. Research consistently points to the need for multi-pronged approaches to changing consumer behaviour in areas such as nutrition, financial services, and pharmaceuticals, to name but a few. All the evidence suggests that point-of-sale information alone is not enough change consumer behaviour.

Of course, there are some fascinating ways in which mobile Internet devices and the general permeation of digital communication have allowed labelling to move beyond a point-of–sale experience. Initiatives such as ecoScan and GoodGuide allow consumers to access vast amounts of information about a product, the brand and its parent company, simply by scanning a bar code. Some of these services already detail product lifecycles and CSR reports, and others are looking to delve further back and map the carbon footprint of suppliers through open data initiatives. All at the finger tips of the conscientious consumer.

But that word ‘conscientious’ is key here. For every consumer that will seek out and act upon this information, there are countless others that won’t. Some of these non-actors will deny their purchasing decisions can make a difference, some will deny there is a problem at all. But most will simply be unaware that there is an issue in the first place.

And of course, all but the saints among us have been guilty, at some point at least, of the latter. Who hasn’t rushed to the shops and grabbed the first carton of milk or the nearest box of washing detergent when needs must. Would an eco-label have made a difference?

This is why Consumers International calls for governments and industry to do more than just put the burden of choice on the consumer when it comes to sustainable consumption. Retailers, for instance, can take the lead by removing the dirtiest products from the shelves in the first place, putting low-impact goods at front-of-store and at prominent promotion points, and stopping two-for-one and BOGOF offers completely. Consumers much prefer half price deals anyway.

When changes are not forthcoming voluntarily, governments need to act clearly and consistently. Thoughtful, well targeted regulation can have a massive impact, with all but non-existent consumer backlash. Just look at how CFC gases were legislated away, or the recent removal of high-energy light bulbs from shop shelves in Europe. Not a complaint in sight.

Would consumers have made the switch themselves if this was left to a label?

Such choice editing, coupled with the availability of well priced, good quality alternatives, has to be at the heart of any real attempt to move consumers onto a more sustainable path.

Labelling and certification schemes are a great way of providing those who care with a choice; they have a crucial role within a larger framework of formal and informal sustainable consumption education that needs to start at primary school age. Unfortunately, the tipping-point level of consumer awareness needed may take a generation.

We don’t have that amount of time. As preparations step up a gear for the UN’s Rio Earth Summit next year, we must acknowledge that we can’t simply wait for consumers to lead the charge on sustainable consumption. Governments and businesses must prioritise making the right choice the easy choice.

Luke Upchurch is Head of Communications and External Affairs at Consumers International.