Environmental labels on meat packaging can discourage meat consumption.
Studies show that adding environmental labels on meat packaging might discourage the purchase of meat and encourage the purchase of healthier and more sustainable plant-based foods.
Why meat is environmentally damaging
Industrial-scale livestock farming has several environmental issues. Livestock, especially cows, produce methane, contributing to global warming faster than carbon dioxide. The demand for meat contributes to deforestation, as forests must be cleared to make space for pastureland or to grow feed crops for livestock. Moreover, meat production is water intensive because it requires large quantities of water for drinking, cleaning, and growing feed crops.
How environmental labels on meat packaging can help
Think of the journey cigarettes have been on. From being featured in advertisements and movies, cigarettes lost popularity when people found out that it caused cancer. From then on, cigarette packages came with warning labels about the health risks and had disturbing images on them to discourage people from smoking.
We are seeing a similar trend with meat products. As more people become aware of the environmental effects of meat, adding environmental labels on meat packaging could discourage the purchase of these products.
A study conducted by psychologists in the UK showed 1000 participants meat products with health pictorial warning labels, climate pictorial warning labels, and pandemic pictorial warning labels. They found that by showing environmental labels on meat packaging reduced the selection of meat meals in an online cafeteria meal selection task.
The next step of this study is to see how such labels affect choices in real-world settings—when factors like smells, prices, and peer pressure might influence consumer decisions. And to see if hypothetical quizzes or tests will actually transfer to a shift in consumer habits.
These environmental warning labels might work because people might start to see the negative outcome attached to meat and may opt for a different food. The extra information on these labels could also get people to think more consciously about their decisions.
There would need to be consideration about how these labels would look like. Are words enough? What would they say? Would images work better? Moreover, consumers don’t want to feel like they are being manipulated into making environmental choices. A lot of research still has to go into this to measure its effectiveness.
If not meat, then what?
What would happen if people chose to stop eating meat entirely? We would see a shift in the livestock and food industries towards the production of more plant-based and alternative protein products.
Plant-based and alternative protein products are designed to provide protein from non-animal sources and are sometimes developed to mimic the taste, texture, and nutritional profile of meat, dairy, and other animal-derived products.
Examples include soy, peas, beans, seaweed or algae products. Plant-based milk alternatives include soy milk, almond milk, and oat milk. Insect-based protein is also rising in popularity to provide a sustainable and protein-rich source. Lab-grown and 3D-printed protein is also making an appearance and is an alternative to reducing the environmental impacts associated with livestock farming.
Moving away from traditional sources of protein, like meat products, is a growing trend. Over the past few years, many restaurants around the world are beginning to offer vegetarian and vegan options. Grocery stores have several sections dedicated to these options, making the shift from meat products easier and more accessible.
Gradual shifts toward more plant-based diets, coupled with sustainable agricultural practices, is a realistic and sustainable approach, but it will not immediately change overnight. Adding warning environmental labels to meat products could help with these shifts and could positively impact our environment.
