Product carbon label - is this one label too many?
A recent discussion on the ABC Radio Bush Telegraph program considered whether a carbon label on products would be welcomed by consumers or lead to confusion due to the suggestion that there is already a proliferation of eco labels (recyclable, organic, energy star, compostable....etc).
Do you think there is a place for product carbon labels in Australia or is this one label too many?
You can listen to the ABC program at:
I think there can be a place. But its more complex than we think. There is much literature about the effectiveness of labels. In short, some work, many don't.
The success of current labels in the market is questionable and it can be difficult to fully evaluate the impact of environmental labels on consumer behaviour. Concerns regarding the environmental characteristics of a product form part of a complex purchasing decision which factors in price, quality and habit. (Horne et al, 2007). The design and information on the label, the certifying body and the environmental marketing that accompanies the product all contribute to the effectiveness of a label (Teisl et al, 2002). So determining whether the label is influencing the consumer is no easy thing. For a wide range of reasons it is also difficult to measure and assess the impact of labels on the environment itself.
Voluntary environmental labels have achieved mixed success in Australia. Lack of standardised definitions and scrutiny of claims can lead to confusion and mistrust amongst consumers (organic, free range). To be effective, labels need to be widespread, consistent and independent. Trust, understanding and awareness play major roles in their success (Horne et al 2007). Given this, mandatory labels may have more success. An example of this is Australia’s mandatory energy and water star rating labels for appliances which have been very successful. The energy star program is widely regarded as among the most informative in the world and is recognised by 94 percent of Australian consumers (Artcraft Research 2005).
Well recognised, trusted, independent and credible labels can form part of the solution to educate consumers on the sustainability of goods. But they won’t ultimately drive change unless there are policy instruments to back them up.
It was interesting to read in the Artcraft Research report that consumers put cost savings (39%) and energy savings (38%) ahead of helping the environment (13%) as the main reasons that they consulted the star labels on appliances. Maybe the cost saving benefit was more reason for the success of this program than it being mandatory.
If a large proportion of consumers are mostly concerned about saving money, what amount of behaviour change can we expect from labels that are associated with environmental and social improvements such as orangutan habitats, carbon emission reductions and the fair treatment of workers? Policies are unlikely to be implemented to support some of these campaigns due to the 'national interest' test and so in these cases, 'care' may need to be added to trust, understanding and awareness if a tipping point is to be reached.
I am not a marketing expert so I wont argue the relevance of a Carbon label as a marketing tool, instead from a different angle, its my point of view that something like the Carbon label can be use to generate internal commitment for excellence from the company that embraces it.
The fact that a company does an LCA for an specific product and instead of putting it in the drawer turns it into the start/strive for continuous improvement from a sustainability perspective makes the idea of the carbon label worthwhile. Creating a baseline and accounting for the improvements forever.
Even if it never sees the retail outlet, the fact of creating a kpi that marketing managers will use to drive their brands sounds like the right thing to do and even better if its done following a standard.
A good question, and in my opinion yes there is a place.
There is always a tension for consumers between being well informed and educated versus being confused or distracted by too much information.
Ultimately though, the fact that many consumers regularly ignore or disregard some or all of the information already on products/packaging (origin of manufacture, ingredients, nutritional value, carbohydrates & kilojoules etc, weight, marketing claims, contact details of supplier, use-by-dates etc) doesn't take away from the fact that we need to have information about the environmental impacts of a product where it can potentially influence both the general purchaser and those who are already looking specifically for low carbon/environmentally preferable products.
Product carbon labels aren't perfect, but they are here already, so its more about managing how they fit into the landscape of product information and labels, and maximising their credibility and effectiveness.