Hostname: page-component-cd9895bd7-hc48f Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-12-22T15:03:34.999Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

The impact of ecolabels on the environmental impact of cafeteria purchases: a randomised controlled trial

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  05 October 2022

R. Pechey ,
P.A. Bateman ,
B. Cook ,
C. Potter ,
M. Clark ,
C. Stewart ,
C. Piernas  and
S.A. Jebb
R. Pechey
Affiliation:
University of Oxford, Oxford, UK
P.A. Bateman
Affiliation:
University of Oxford, Oxford, UK
B. Cook
Affiliation:
University of Oxford, Oxford, UK
C. Potter
Affiliation:
University of Oxford, Oxford, UK
M. Clark
Affiliation:
University of Oxford, Oxford, UK
C. Stewart
Affiliation:
University of Oxford, Oxford, UK
C. Piernas
Affiliation:
University of Oxford, Oxford, UK
S.A. Jebb
Affiliation:
University of Oxford, Oxford, UK
Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Abstract

An abstract is not available for this content. As you have access to this content, full HTML content is provided on this page. A PDF of this content is also available in through the ‘Save PDF’ action button.
Type
Abstract
Information
Proceedings of the Nutrition Society , Volume 81 , Issue OCE5: Summer Conference 2022, 12–15 July 2022, Food and Nutrition: pathways to a sustainable future , 2022 , E166
Check for updates
Copyright
Copyright © The Authors 2022

Meeting global climate targets will require a marked reduction in environmental impacts caused by dietary patterns(Reference Willett, Rockström and Loken1). Ecolabels – indicating the environmental impact of products – have been shown to reduce the environmental impact of food selections in studies using an online experimental supermarket(Reference Potter, Pechey and Clark2,Reference Potter, Pechey and Cook3) , but their effectiveness in settings involving real food purchases is unclear(Reference Potter, Bastounis and Hartmann-Boyce4). This study examined the effectiveness of ecolabels at reducing the environmental impact of purchases in worksite cafeterias. Worksite cafeterias (n = 28) were randomised to either control (no labels) or ecolabel conditions. Between May and September 2021, sites in the ecolabel condition (n = 13) labelled hot meals with their environmental impact (scored from A-E), placed next to the name of the meal on printed menus. Mixed effect regression models examined the impact of labelling on the mean environmental impact (EcoScore; 1 = lowest impact; 100 = highest impact) of meals purchased each week. Ethics approval was granted 02/12/2020 by the Central University Research Ethics Committee, University of Oxford (Ref: R72710/RE001). The mean EcoScore of meals purchased at baseline was 67.9 (s.d. 10.9) in control sites vs. 70.3 (s.d. 8.6) for intervention sites; and during the intervention period was 69.9 (SD 9.0) for control sites vs. 71.3 (s.d. 8.4) for intervention sites. There was no evidence of an impact of ecolabels on the mean environmental impact of meals purchased either in intention-to-treat (-1.01, 95%CI -3.11 to 1.08) or per-protocol (-0.90, 95%CI -2.81 to 1.01) analyses. The majority of main meal options sold were rated ‘E’ in both control and intervention sites. When ecolabels were applied to hot meals within worksite cafeterias, the environmental impact of food purchases overall was unchanged. However, the potential effectiveness was limited by the narrow range of options available.

References

Willett, W, Rockström, J, Loken, B, et al. . (2019) The Lancet 393 (10170), 447–492.10.1016/S0140-6736(18)31788-4CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Potter, C, Pechey, R, Clark, M, et al. . (in submission).Google Scholar
Potter, C, Pechey, R, Cook, B, et al. . (in submission).Google Scholar
Potter, C, Bastounis, A, Hartmann-Boyce, J, et al. . (2021) Environment & Behavior 53 (8), 891–925.CrossRefGoogle Scholar