• Up to date information
  • On the pulse
  • Interest in our Industry
Carbon_footprint_image___Food_Labelling_Services_1481109625

Marketing meat alternatives: Why carbon labels don't stick... yet

Last year mycoprotein manufacturer Quorn invested in some research. The manufacturer of meat alternatives wanted to compare the carbon impact of its products with their meaty cousins. A life cycle analysis (LCA) showed the carbon footprint of the company’s mince product is 90% smaller than beef mince, whilst its chicken pieces ‘emit’ 75% less carbon than ‘real’ chicken.

These were “remarkable” results, the firm noted. Perhaps so, given the extent of the emissions gap between the two protein sources. But are consumers really that interested?

It depends on the market, according to Alex Glen, head of brand communications at Quorn. In Sweden, sustainability is high on consumers’ agenda, whilst in the UK and the US it’s a “growing trend, but not yet driving purchasing behaviour as much it will do in the next few years”.

 

You can read the full article HERE

 

Food Labelling Services comments:

Food labelling should be clear and market a defined message to the consumer. However, the labels should not be too complicated and mask the key values - whether this is nutrition, health and nutrition claims or other marketing communication. Brands and retailers should decide what their USP is, and tailor the marketing around this. Any marketing information however, has to comply with the standards set in the Food Information for Consumers regulation 1169/2011 and be fair and not mislead the consumer.