To label or not to label? A meta-regression analysis of consumer willingness to pay for sustainability claims

Sustainability labels (SLs) are increasingly promoted to guide consumer behavior towards more sustainable consumption choices. As a result, research on SLs has increased with numerous studies and reviews highlighting how specific sustainability claims are valued by consumers. This study presents a comprehensive meta-analysis of willingness to pay (WTP) for SLs displayed on food products, including a wide range of studies focusing on diverse food categories. To conduct the meta-analysis on SLs, Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses (PRISMA) guidelines was used. The analysis reveals that consumers, on average, are willing to pay a 29% price premium for products bearing SLs. This mean value masks significant heterogeneity in relation to label and product categories as well as consumer socioeconomic factors. Notably, carbon labels were associated with lower percentage premium WTP, while geographic and animal welfare labels drove higher premiums. From a product perspective, higher percentage premium WTP is observed for SL when used in meat, dairy, alcohol, coffee, and cereals when compared to vegetables. Moreover, consumers in higher-education segments tend to exhibit lower relative WTP, potentially reflecting greater skepticism toward label claims. Percentage WTP premium also decreases with higher product prices, indicating price sensitivity. Studies published after 2017 tend to report higher percentage WTP premium values, possibly linked to increased awareness of sustainability issues. The results empower policymakers, marketers, and stakeholders seeking to design more effective sustainability communication strategies, emphasizing the importance of label type, context, and consumer segmentation. • Consumers are willing to pay on average a 29% premium for labels associated with sustainability. • Animal Welfare and Geographic Origin labels drive higher WTP than holistic SLs. • Carbon labels yield lower WTP than holistic or social sustainability claims. • WTP varies by product and label type, highlighting a no one-size-fits-all solution.

Authors

Institutions

Publication Details

Journal
Trends in Food Science & Technology
Published
2025-11-13
DOI
https://doi.org/10.1016/j.tifs.2025.105435
Primary Topic
Organic Food and Agriculture
Type
article
Field-Weighted Citation Impact
0.00
Controls
|||
ALL TIME
JAN
FEB
MAR
APR
MAY
JUN
JUL
AUG
SEP
OCT
article

To label or not to label? A meta-regression analysis of consumer willingness to pay for sustainability claims

Giovanni Sogari, Davide Menozzi, Juan Tur-Cardona, Giulia Andreani et al.
Trends in Food Science & Technology
Organic Food and Agriculture
article

To label or not to label? A meta-regression analysis of consumer willingness to pay for sustainability claims

Giovanni Sogari, Davide Menozzi, Juan Tur-Cardona, Giulia Andreani, Federico Antonioli, Jesús Barreiro‐Hurlé
article en

Abstract

Sustainability labels (SLs) are increasingly promoted to guide consumer behavior towards more sustainable consumption choices. As a result, research on SLs has increased with numerous studies and reviews highlighting how specific sustainability claims are valued by consumers. This study presents a comprehensive meta-analysis of willingness to pay (WTP) for SLs displayed on food products, including a wide range of studies focusing on diverse food categories. To conduct the meta-analysis on SLs, Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses (PRISMA) guidelines was used. The analysis reveals that consumers, on average, are willing to pay a 29% price premium for products bearing SLs. This mean value masks significant heterogeneity in relation to label and product categories as well as consumer socioeconomic factors. Notably, carbon labels were associated with lower percentage premium WTP, while geographic and animal welfare labels drove higher premiums. From a product perspective, higher percentage premium WTP is observed for SL when used in meat, dairy, alcohol, coffee, and cereals when compared to vegetables. Moreover, consumers in higher-education segments tend to exhibit lower relative WTP, potentially reflecting greater skepticism toward label claims. Percentage WTP premium also decreases with higher product prices, indicating price sensitivity. Studies published after 2017 tend to report higher percentage WTP premium values, possibly linked to increased awareness of sustainability issues. The results empower policymakers, marketers, and stakeholders seeking to design more effective sustainability communication strategies, emphasizing the importance of label type, context, and consumer segmentation. • Consumers are willing to pay on average a 29% premium for labels associated with sustainability. • Animal Welfare and Geographic Origin labels drive higher WTP than holistic SLs. • Carbon labels yield lower WTP than holistic or social sustainability claims. • WTP varies by product and label type, highlighting a no one-size-fits-all solution.

Trends in Food Science & TechnologyVol. 170
University of Parma (IT), Joint Research Centre (IT), Joint Research Center (ES)
Openalex Percentile: Top 75%
Organic Food and Agriculture
AI Navigator

Ask Laika to Summarize, Analyze, and Connect papers live on the map.

Summarize Papers & Methodologies

Extract key findings, datasets, and comparative methods across publications.

Benchmark Rankings & Visual Analytics

Rank top research institutions, authors, funders, topics, and journals by Field-Weighted Citation Impact (FWCI) and paper volume with instant charts.

Connect Distant Disciplines

Bridge topological clusters on the map to find hidden collaborative intersections.