Copyright © ChangeInc 2023

As an experiment, supermarket chain Jumbo put meat substitutes among the meat on the same shelf at seven stores. Perhaps then people would choose the vegetarian option more often, was the idea. Now that this has proven to have little effect, meat and meat alternatives are being separated again. What measures do work?

According to a Jumbo spokeswoman, the action had insufficient effect. "We mainly saw that people who normally eat vegetarian had more trouble finding the products. Also meat eaters were hardly tempted to make another choice," the spokeswoman said.

More needed

When Jumbo began the pilot earlier this year, Change Inc. spoke with behavioral psychologist Chantal van den Berg. "This is a good step, but to really bring about a change, more is needed," she said at the time. Now that this prediction has come true, the question arises as to what does help.

What does help?

One success story comes from the Norwegian supermarket Oda. There they saw sales of meat drop after customers were confronted with the carbon footprint of their purchases on the receipt. According to Louise Fuchs, head of sustainability at Oda, customers find it virtually impossible to judge which purchases are climate-friendly. Therefore, products were labeled high, medium or low carbon footprint. This led to fewer meat sales and even an increase in sales of vegetarian products. Fuchs: "One in five of the burgers we sell is now vegetarian, and vegetarian meals have become a lot more popular. The recipe for lentil soup was even in the top 10. That was unthinkable just a year ago."

Climate warning

A study by the American Johns Hopkins University shows the same thing. Scientists sought out the effects of climate-negative and -positive labels on the food choices people make. They asked some five thousand Americans to choose a dish from a menu.

One menu indicated that dishes with red meat have a negative impact on the climate. The dish was given a red label saying, "This item has high greenhouse gas emissions and a high contribution to climate change."

The other menu contains green labels with positive text accompanying more sustainable dishes without meat. The message: "This item is environmentally sustainable. It has low greenhouse gas emissions and a low contribution to climate change."

Compared to participants in the control group (who were shown a menu without labels), 23.5 percent more participants chose a sustainable dish when shown the menu with red labels. When shown the menu with green labels, nearly 10 percent more participants chose a more sustainable product. So, according to the researchers, it works better if the negative impact of food is emphasized rather than the positive impact.

Next step

After this test, Jumbo will look at other ways to raise awareness of meat substitutes among customers. What these tests look like is still unknown. "At Jumbo, we support the transition to a more plant-based diet," spokesperson Paulien Straeter revealed earlier. "By 2030 we want to have achieved a ratio of 50 percent vegetable and 50 percent animal products. This is in line with the National Protein Strategy. With this in mind, we are also continuously expanding our range of vega and vegan products."

© The Content Exchange, source News