Should I Buy Organic Food? A Psychological Perspective on Purchase Decisions - Organic Food and Agriculture: New Trends and Developments in the Social Sciences - page 51

labelling schemes. Furthermore, most people indicated very limited knowledge about what
the labels actually stand for and even about some of the basic concepts involved.
Teisl and Roe (2005) summarize the factors that contribute to effective eco-labelling
programmes. First of all, customers have to notice, understand and belief the information
communicated by the label. Since customers do not have the means to verify that a certain
product actually fulfils the standards that the eco-label promises, the “belief” is a matter
of trust and credibility of the certifying institution, which has been discussed in section 4.
“Notice” addresses the problem that the eco-label is competing for customers' attention
with many other labels, logos and visual influences in the supermarket. 1 To become
relevant in a decision it has to be - at least subconsciously - noticed. Furthermore, the
customer needs to be able to connect the label with a message relevant for him or her (e.g.,
this produce is from organic farming). Teisl and Roe (2005) found in a series of
experiments with differently designed eco-labels that their perceived credibility was
higher if contact information was added, if more detailed numbers instead of summary
scores were presented, if the certificating organization was familiar to the customer,
independent from the producer, and visible with a logo close to the label or in the label.
Biel and Grankvist (2010) also found in a study with professional food purchasers that
more detailed information positively impacted the choice of the more environmentally
friendly product. Teisl and Roe (2005) were also able to show that credible labels had an
effect on product choice. Tang et al. (2004) analysed the impact of visual and verbal
communication on eco-labels and found that both had an independent and additive effect,
meaning that combining visual and verbal communication had the largest effect.
Søderskov and Daugbjerg (2011) were able to show that trust in eco-labels is higher in
countries with where the state is more involved in assigning eco-labels.
Leire and Thidell (2005) outline in a review paper that Nordic customers are to a large extent
very aware of eco-labels: they recognize them, know about their background and trust the
certifying authorities sufficiently. However, a much smaller proportion of the Nordic
population actually buys products with these labels. Leire and Thidell (2005) conclude that
the use of eco-labels in the dynamics of and in interaction with the choice situation in the
supermarket is under-researched.
Grankvist et al. (2004) experimentally compared the effect of positive labels and negative
labels. Positive labels indicate the benefit the use of a product has for the environment
compared to an average product; negative labels indicate the increased negative outcomes
the use of a product would have compared to an average product from that category. They
found an interesting interaction between the effect of positive and negative labels and the
consumers environmental interest: people with low environmental interest were not
affected by any type of label, people with high environmental interest reacted to both types,
but individuals with an intermediate interest reacted more strongly to the negative label.
The effect that negative information had stronger effects than positive was also replicated by
Biel and Grankvist (2010). Given that almost all food labels are positive labels this finding
indicates that negative labels on especially environmentally damaging products could reach
a higher proportion of the population - not taking the feasibility of that approach in current
market conditions into account.
1 When the consumer decides to shop in an organic food speciality store organic food labels only have a
reduced importance: to select between different organic food standards.