Labeling the carbon content of consumer products: more than just hot air?

Canadians are confused and skeptical about environmental claims and logos of all kinds. Not only do many place little trust in them, but others doubt that products labelled in this way are genuinely better for the environment. This prospective research on carbon labelling of consumer products seeks to assess the interest for Canada of implementing a labelling system that would inform consumers about the carbon footprint of a consumer product, and to analyze emerging practices elsewhere.
emerging practices elsewhere.

To achieve this, we developed a research strategy using a variety of complementary techniques. First, we set the scene with a literature search that explained the interest and relevance of the research. This included definitions of key terms and identified the main greenhouse gases and their sources. Next, we provided an overview of carbon labelling initiatives for consumer products. These aim to better inform consumers and equip them to make informed "green" choices when purchasing products. This overview culminated in three detailed case studies of carbon labelling schemes underway in the UK (Tesco), Switzerland (Climatop) and South Korea (Keiti). Complementing our documentary research, we conducted two public opinion surveys and a focus group.

Our literature search, in which we identified thirteen initiatives and carried out an in-depth analysis of three of them, enabled us to make several findings. Firstly, the urgent need to act to minimize the effects of climate change on our societies and on future generations. Secondly, the main opportunities open to us to enable consumers to make informed choices. Finally, the main steps taken to date to inform consumers about the carbon footprint of consumer products.

Our survey and focus groups were very informative. Generally speaking, Canadians are concerned about the state of the environment. They want things to change, they want to do more individually. But they are often confused and at a loss. Many things (time, money, information, knowledge) prevent them from taking the action needed to reduce greenhouse gases overall.

Interestingly, the act of consuming is not instinctively associated with contemporary environmental issues such as climate change. What's more, Canadians say they are prepared to change their behaviour for the good of the environment if they are convinced that these changes will have a real impact, or that the difference their choices will make will be significant. However, more significant lifestyle changes, akin to sacrifices (e.g., reducing meat consumption), are harder to instill. The challenge is considerable, given that climate change is, by its very nature, a diffuse pollution that is difficult to measure and requires significant efforts.

We also note that product labels are still the preferred information vehicle for Canadians, and must therefore be used wisely. Canadians seem dissatisfied with the current system regulating environmental claims; they find it highly inefficient, as it doesn't enable them to make the best choices in terms of the environment. There is a great deal of confusion, misunderstanding and even frustration when it comes to the information available, despite the fact that consumers seem to want it. Even if labelling
labeling of consumer products is welcomed by most Canadians, they believe it should not be done haphazardly.

Consumers' preferences as to what information should be included on a product are not always the same. However, there is some consensus on a series of criteria that could contribute to a better understanding of the information provided. Canadians want credible information, but they also want useful information. A simple figure is interesting, but if it's decontextualized, it can be difficult to understand. The comparison scale is appreciated, and helps to overcome the disadvantages of complex information (whatever the means used - red to green color, numbers from 1 to 10, seal on the best products). Certification and vigilance by independent third parties or the government seem to be a must for Canadians, who take it for granted that the government verifies the information found on labels. While it's important to inform consumers, it's also important to capture their attention. This can be done through bright colors and attractive graphics, but also through education campaigns that raise awareness of a particular claim.

Against this backdrop, the idea of introducing a carbon labeling system for consumer products seems tempting, and could in principle provide consumers with relevant information. As our case studies have shown, this type of initiative has grown rapidly in recent years. However, our careful analysis of existing international models reveals a number of weaknesses and gaps that remain unresolved. With this in mind, Option consommateurs recommends caution and patience before embarking on any major program. This applies equally to governments and to companies tempted to label their consumer products on their own initiative.

Indeed, even though techniques and standards are emerging rapidly, and the International Organization for Standardization (ISO) is in the process of completing its own standard, many technical aspects are still unresolved. It seems only natural to wait for its publication before considering moving forward in this area. We are also concerned about the reliability and reproducibility of carbon footprint calculations. It's not clear that even the best standard will ever be able to solve the problem of reliable information on the carbon footprint of consumer products.
This is particularly true given the complexity and fluidity of global trade.

In short, Option consommateurs urges caution and restraint before embarking on a strategy to provide information on the carbon content of consumer products. In addition, we question whether this type of information should be communicated directly to consumers, or whether it should be limited to being a decision-making tool for companies in their purchasing criteria.