A little while ago I posted my thoughts on 'Radical Tranpsarency' when it comes to the ecological impact of how a product is made. The article quoted a survey that indicated that only 10% of people would go out of their way to find out the eco-impact of a product, while two thirds of shoppers feel that they would take the eco-impact into account when making a decision if the information was readily available.
You can read that blog post (if you missed it the first time round) here.
Today, I've read this article on the guardian website, which further supports that there should be clearer labelling on products indicating eco-impact, as well as it's sustainability and ethical credentials. A survey by Which? found that seven out of 10 consumers would pay more attention to the environmental impact of the food they buy if labels were clearer.
The awareness of the nine main schemes used was shown to be low, even though the internationally recognised Fairtrade label was recognised, but many didn't understand what it meant. Only 3% of those asked were aware of LEAF (Linking Environment and Farming), which supports sustainable farming, and only 6% recognised the Marine Stewardship Council label, which supports sustainably sourced fish and seafood.
I think it's great that Which? want to work with the government to provide honesty in food labelling. It has already been shown that two thirds of people would be affected by labels indicating the eco-impact of food, therefore, I think food needs to be labelled with all the environmental information available.
I'm in the same boat as most of the people surveyed, but if I knew more about these labels and understood what they meant I think they would affect my shopping habits.
What do you think? Do you wish food labels were clearer so you could buy more environmentally friendly products? I would love to hear your thoughts.
Laura
Monday, 27 September 2010
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
No comments:
Post a Comment