Case studies: Consumers

This report synthesizes the results of two studies on supermarket interventions aimed at reducing the climate footprint of food consumption. Food systems account for approximately one-third of global anthropogenic greenhouse gas emissions. The Farm to Fork Strategy acknowledges the urgent need to reduce the climate footprint of the European food system through a comprehensive transition across the entire food chain, including shifts in consumers’ food choices. The retail sector plays a pivotal role in shaping markets and influencing consumers’ dietary choices, and the Farm to Fork Strategy explicitly calls for changes in food distribution and marketing practices.

The overarching objective of the two empirical studies presented in this report was to investigate the effectiveness of supermarket interventions in reducing the climate impact of food consumption through shifts in consumer behaviour towards more sustainable food choices. The two studies tested a set of interventions through an online supermarket experiment embedded within a consumer survey. We simulated a realistic online supermarket environment, providing a means to assess households’ food purchase behaviour across different food categories. Study 1 focussed on behavioural interventions and tested the effects of a placement intervention (i.e. the strategic placement of plant-based assortments within the meat and dairy sections), a climate label (i.e. a traffic-light label based on CO₂e emissions), and the combination of the two. The study was conducted in Germany, Denmark, Spain and Hungary with a sample of N=7,373 participants. Study 2 tested the effects of price changes (i.e. price increases for high-emission foods and/or price decreases for low-emission foods), climate labelling (i.e. information on the CO₂e emissions of food products) and different combinations of these treatment interventions. The study was conducted in Italy, Poland and the United Kingdom with a representative sample of N=7,482 consumers.

Study 1 on behavioural supermarket interventions in Germany, Denmark, Spain and Hungary showed that the strategic placement of plant-based assortments in the meat and dairy sections as well as the introduction of a climate label can reduce the carbon footprint of food purchases, particularly when implemented jointly. The effectiveness of the tested interventions varied across countries and not all effects were statistically significant. Across Germany, Denmark, and Spain, the combination of the placement intervention with a climate label resulted in the greatest reduction in emissions by –13% to –16% (compared to the control group). In Spain and Denmark, the introduction of a climate label also had a statistically significant effect. The placement intervention by itself had a significant effect only in Denmark. In Hungary, none of the tested interventions significantly reduced the climate impact of food purchases; however, the combined intervention led to a significant reduction of climate emissions among younger age groups (up to 40 years).

Study 2 on price- and information-based interventions in Italy, Poland and the United Kingdom found that price mechanisms and information are effective tools to reduce emissions from food consumption behaviours. While price increases for high-emission foods had, on average, the strongest effects in terms of emission reductions (–4% to –9%) across all three countries, the effect size of the remaining interventions differed across countries, suggesting that the optimal implementation may depend on specific country settings. Price discounts for low-emission foods by themselves did not lead to the desired effect of reducing the climate impact of food consumption, but instead had a null (Italy) or even positive effect (Poland and the United Kingdom) on food-related emissions – unless combined with climate labelling and/or price increases for high-emission foods. Climate labelling by itself (without the implementation of price changes) yielded remarkable significant reductions in emissions in Poland and the United Kingdom, but was ineffective in Italy. The results from Study 2 additionally show that it is possible to achieve equivalent emission reductions using different mixes of instruments and that solutions should be carefully chosen and tailored depending on the country context and objectives.

In both studies, significant reductions in the climate impact of food purchases were primarily driven by lower purchased quantities of high-emission foods, particularly beef and cheese. Although the average decrease in the purchased quantity of these items was relatively modest, the corresponding reduction in CO₂e emissions was substantial, underscoring that even small shifts in consumer behaviour away from high-emission, animal-based foods can yield significant climate benefits.

The tested interventions promoting (plant-based) foods with low CO₂e emissions – the placement intervention in Study 1, and the price discount intervention in Study 2 – successfully increased the purchases of these products in all countries across both studies. Interestingly, when implemented as single interventions rather than as part of an instrument mix that also modifies aspects of high-emission foods, these measures failed to significantly reduce the climate impact of food purchases. Consumers exposed to these interventions did not significantly reduce the consumption of high-emission foods so that the desired substitution from high- to low-emission foods did not occur.

The findings from the two studies raise important questions about the role and power of supermarkets in shaping the food environments within which consumers make their food choices. The studies demonstrate that far-reaching measures implemented in supermarkets have the potential to substantially reduce the climate footprint of food consumption in the EU through shifting consumer behaviour towards more sustainable food choices. However, while the retail sector holds significant leverage to drive such change, the commercial interests of retailers are not necessarily aligned with policy objectives aimed at reducing the climate impact of food consumption. This report seeks to inform and motivate both private and public stakeholders in the food sector to act upon these insights.

The full report will be available soon.

This report brings together evidence from seven empirical studies examining how adjustments to food environments can encourage more sustainable food consumption. Food systems are key contributors to environmental degradation, driving habitat loss, water pollution, biodiversity decline, and climate change (Crippa et al., 2021). In response, the European Union’s Farm to Fork Strategy seeks to reduce the environmental and climate footprint of the food system by promoting changes across the value chain, from production to consumption (European Commission, 2020). Within this transformation, the retail sector occupies a strategic position, as it shapes product availability, marketing activities, and purchasing contexts, and is therefore explicitly targeted in the Strategy’s call for changes in food distribution and promotion practices.

The seven studies synthesised in this report evaluate a broad set of interventions, mostly within the operational scope of private food retailers, including choice architecture measures, pricing strategies, climate labels, and other point-of-purchase tools. Collectively, they address two overarching objectives central to the transition toward more sustainable food systems:

• Reducing the climate impact of food consumption through supermarket-based interventions (Studies 1–5)
• Promoting consumption of locally produced food through short supply chains (Studies 6 & 7)

Studies 1 and 2 analysed how supermarket interventions influence the climate impact of entire food baskets, drawing on cross-country survey experiments. Study 3 focused on consumer substitution between meat and legumes under different pricing scenarios using survey-based experiments conducted in Denmark. Studies 4 and 5 tested in-store promotional strategies designed to increase legume purchases through field experiments in operational supermarkets in Spain and Denmark. Study 6 evaluated the effectiveness of different promotional messages in attracting customers to a farm shop in England, while Study 7 explored consumer perceptions, emotional responses, and shopping behaviours related to farmers markets in Romania, with an emphasis on locally produced food.

Taken together, the findings of the seven studies demonstrate that behavioural interventions in food retail environments can steer consumer purchasing toward more sustainable options. However, their individual effects are typically modest. The evidence strongly suggests that integrated intervention packages – particularly those combining pricing measures, climate labelling, and strategic product placement – are substantially more effective than isolated actions. Meaningful reductions in the climate impact of food consumption therefore require structural changes to food environments rather than reliance on voluntary or informational measures alone.

Many of the effective interventions identified fall within the operational scope of private food retailers, positioning them as important facilitators of change. At the same time, this reliance on retailer action poses limitations from a policy perspective. While retailers can play a key enabling role, they are unlikely to serve as the primary drivers of systemic change. Public policy instruments – such as regulation, fiscal incentives, and mandatory information requirements – are likely necessary to align retail practices more closely with broader sustainability objectives.

The full report will be available soon.

This report (Deliverable 2.2) builds on the initial conceptual and analytical framework of the VISIONARY project and aims to map out how the case studies selected in VISIONARY complement each other to address key objectives for the project. The report aims to briefly outline the theoretical foundations of our work and outline the approach taken in the case studies.

This study (Deliverable 2.1) consists of a systematic literature review to map levers and lock-ins to give an overview of drivers for behaviour change and their relevance to specific actors in the food system and specific value chains. This was achieved by performing an umbrella review of systematic and structured literature reviews conducted in relation to the behavioural aspects of sustainability transition in food systems. This review resulted in a systematic mapping of the factors influencing behavioural change of food system actors (so called 360° Reviews) and a narrative synthesis of the recommendations made by the selected reviews.

Find all key facts about VISIONARY at one glance.

This Analytical Framework will steer the empirical research of the VISIONARY project, with regards to policy interventions, to novel value chain initiatives and business models, and to leverage points in the agri-food systems. The Analytical Framework adopts a novel approach combining two substantially different approaches: quantitative, experimental and behavioural economics on the one hand, and qualitative, comprehensive systems thinking approaches on the other.

This Initial Conceptual Framework assembles VISIONARY’s theoretical and conceptual foundations, explaining the systemic character of the food system and its transitions towards sustainability, the role of food actors’ behavioural factors in conditioning such transition and the interaction between research and policy-making to accelerate. This initial framework sets the foundations for the ‘Empirically grounded Conceptual Framework’ to be released in the summer of 2025. After a preliminary review of the approaches revolving around food system transition towards sustainability and its behavioural dimension (in particular of farmers and consumers), the document focuses on two main domains: ‘behavioural food policies’ and ‘sustainable business models’. Finally, the document deepens into the transdisciplinary approach of the project, based upon the concept and implementation of Science-Policy Interfaces.