Environmental advertising and food products: Is there an ideal matchup?

Abstract

This research aims to compare the effectiveness of environmental claims with informational and emotional appeals when applied to utilitarian and hedonic food products. The theoretical framework of congruency effects indicates that under matching conditions consumers are more likely to have stronger attitudes, purchase intentions and willingness to pay. This means that environmental claims with informational appeal would be more effective when applied to utilitarian food products, while environmental claims with emotional appeal would be more effective when applied to hedonic foods. A study with a general sample from the United States suggests no ideal match between sustainable labels and foods, although emotional labels performed consistently better across conditions, not only when compared to foods with no labels, but also as compared to informational labels. Significant changes in attitudes were noticed especially for the utilitarian food and, more specifically, on consumers’ affective attitude. Unexpectedly, however, there were not observed significant differences in outcomes among consumers with distinct levels of environmental values. These findings call attention for the need of more research in the area in order to fully understand the persuasion mechanisms of environmental advertising. Nonetheless, emotional labels applied parsimoniously to foods products might represent an opportunity to foster sustainable consumption, especially for utilitarian foods.