Make Climate-Smart Choices: How Enhanced Food Labels Can Help You Select Eco-Friendly Options

When choosing what to eat for lunch or dinner, have you ever thought about how it affects the environment? Many people don’t know how to compare the carbon footprints of different meals, like a beef sandwich versus a falafel wrap.

In Australia, meat contributes to nearly half of the greenhouse gas emissions from food prepared at home. Switching to plant-based meals could significantly cut down these emissions. However, many individuals lack the knowledge to make informed decisions.

Research shows that labeling food with its carbon source—animal versus plant—can guide consumers toward more sustainable choices. In our latest study, we found that such labels help people opt for plant-based foods more often.

Many people underestimate the difference in emissions between animal and plant-based products. For example, producing one kilogram of beef results in 60 kilograms of greenhouse gases, while producing the same weight of peas emits only 1 kilogram. Yet, most believe the difference is much smaller. These misconceptions matter because agriculture is responsible for about a third of global greenhouse gas emissions, with animal products being the largest contributors.

Carbon labels indicate the greenhouse gas emissions for food items. While there’s a growing interest in these labels worldwide, they’re still not common, especially in Australia. Many existing carbon labels only show numbers and color codes, which indicate environmental impact but don’t clarify whether the food is animal or plant-based. This omission can lead to confusion.

To address this, we developed a new label that clearly states whether food comes from plants or animals and includes standard emissions scores. Our approach is especially helpful for pre-packaged meals that often mix meat and plant ingredients.

Our label helps consumers connect food sources with their carbon footprints. When people see high emissions scores linked to meat products, they start to understand the impact of their choices. We tested our labels with 1,817 participants across Australia, the US, and the Netherlands.

One experiment used soups; those who saw our label were better at recognizing the higher emissions associated with animal-based soups. In another test, Australian participants who viewed meal options with our labels chose fewer animal-based dishes compared to those who didn’t see the labels. The results suggested our label is more effective at encouraging climate-friendly choices.

In the Netherlands, showing our label led university students to choose plant-based snacks over animal-based ones. Overall, while some people care deeply about sustainable eating, just having the right information can help everyone make better choices.

This research shows that small changes in labeling could guide consumers toward more environmentally friendly diets. For businesses and policymakers, it highlights that simply providing carbon numbers isn’t enough—indicating the food’s source also matters.

Some restaurants and food companies are beginning to use carbon labels to promote sustainable options. Our findings suggest that integrating our new labels with existing carbon information could be more effective in encouraging eco-friendly dining choices.

As Australia works toward its climate goals, helping consumers understand the effects of their food choices will be crucial. Research shows that almost half of Australians consider sustainability important in their shopping habits, even amid rising living costs.

However, many sustainable efforts in retail focus on recyclable packaging and local products, which have less impact on carbon emissions than reducing animal product consumption. We need to equip people with the right tools to turn their environmental concerns into actionable steps. Our carbon labels could help bridge that gap, making it easier for consumers to translate their values into real change.