Skip to main content
SpringerLink
Log in

Do Biodegradable Labels Lead to an Eco-safety Halo Effect?

  • Original Paper
  • Published:
Journal of Consumer Policy Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

Biodegradable products allure consumers despite complications associated with developing consistent guidelines for degradability and potential misperceptions regarding what biodegradability means to consumers. This research investigates inferences consumers make about products bearing 100% biodegradable labels and uses the halo effect as a theoretical foundation for investigation. Past research has found that health labels can have a general halo effect and promote beliefs about attributes unrelated to health claims. The results of two experiments suggest that 100% biodegradable labeling produces a similar eco-safety halo. This eco-safety halo is characterized by assumed consumer safety and environmental attributes of 100% biodegradable products. Results are presented along with implications, limitation, and directions for future research.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Log in via an institution

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Institutional subscriptions

Similar content being viewed by others

References

  • Åberg, H., Dahlman, S., Shanahan, H., & Säljö, R. (1996). Towards sound environmental behaviour: exploring household participation in waste management. Journal of Consumer Policy, 19(1), 45–67.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Alwitt, L. F., & Pitts, R. E. (1996). Predicting purchase intentions for an environmentally sensitive product. Journal of Consumer Psychology, 5(1), 49–64.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Amos, C., Pentina, I., Hawkins, T. G., & Davis, N. (2014). “Natural” labeling and consumers’ sentimental pastoral notion. Journal of Product & Brand Management, 23(4/5), 268–281.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Apaolaza, V., Hartmann, P., Echebarria, C., & Barrutia, J. M. (2017). Organic label’s halo effect on sensory and hedonic experience of wine: a pilot study. Journal of Sensory Studies, 32(1), 1–11.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Arhangelsky, P. (2015). FTC ban of “biodegradable” claims threatens expansion of FTC authority. Retrieved June 21, 2016 from http://emord.com/blawg/ftcs-ban-of-biodegradable-claims-in-the-ecm-case-threatens-an-expansion-of-ftc-authority-case-comment/.

  • Barber, N., Taylor, D. C., & Deale, C. S. (2010). Wine tourism, environmental concerns, and purchase intention. Journal of Travel & Tourism Marketing, 27(2), 146–165.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Bettman, J. R., Payne, J. W., & Staelin, R. (1986). Cognitive considerations in designing effective labels for presenting risk information. Journal of Public Policy & Marketing, 5, 1–28.

    Google Scholar 

  • Bondi, C. A. M. (2011). Applying the precautionary principle to consumer household cleaning product development. Journal of Cleaner Production, 19(5), 429–437.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • BPI. (2015). Confused by the terms biodegradable and biobased. Biodegradable Products Institute. Retrieved June 21, 2016 from http://www.bpiworld.org/science-of-composting.

  • Brockhaus, S., Petersen, M., & Kersten, W. (2016). A crossroads for bioplastics: exploring product developers’ challenges to move beyond petroleum-based plastics. Journal of Cleaner Production, 127, 84–95.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Chandon, P., & Wansink, B. (2007). The biasing health halos of fast-food restaurant health claims: lower calorie estimates and higher side-dish consumption intentions. Journal of Consumer Research, 34(3), 301–314.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Cude, B. J. (1993). Consumer perceptions of environmental marketing claims: an exploratory study. Journal of Consumer Studies and Home Economics, 17(3), 207–225.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Dahl, R. (2010). Green washing: do you know what you’re buying. Environmental Health Perspectives, 118(6), A246–A252.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Delmas, M. A., & Burbano, V. C. (2011). The drivers of greenwashing. California Management Review, 54(1), 64–87.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Duffus, J., Nordberg, M., & Templeton, D. M. (2007). Glossary of terms used in toxicology, 2nd edition. Pure and Applied Chemistry, 79(7), 1153–1344.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Duvall, M., & Carra, R. (2015). FTC backs off green guides biodegradability standard: environmental and natural resources law, attorneys, beveridge & diamond. Retrieved June 21, 2016, from http://www.bdlaw.com/news-1799.html.

  • Eaton, K. (2011). Biodegradable products are good for landfills, but bad for the climate. Fast Company. Retrieved June 29, 2016 from http://www.fastcompany.com/1756520/biodegradable-products-are-good-landfills-bad-climate

  • EPA. (1992). Compendium of materials on municipal solid waste. United States environmental protection agency. Retrieved June 20, 2016, from http://bit.ly/2iOm1E0.

  • EPA. (2016a). Pesticide labeling questions & answers [policies and guidance]. Retrieved June 21, 2016, from https://www.epa.gov/pesticide-labels/pesticide-labeling-questions-answers

  • EPA, O (2016b). Criteria for biodegradability claims on products registered under FIFRA [Overviews and Factsheets]. Retrieved June 21, 2016, from https://www.epa.gov/pesticide-labels/criteria-biodegradability-claims-products-registered-under-fifra.

  • Erickson, G. M., Johansson, J. K., & Chao, P. (1984). Image variables in multi-attribute product evaluations: country-of-origin effects. Journal of Consumer Research, 11(2), 694.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Ford, G. T., Hastak, M., Mitra, A., & Ringold, D. J. (1996). Can consumers interpret nutrition information in the presence of a health claim? A laboratory investigation. Journal of Public Policy & Marketing, 15(1), 16–27.

    Google Scholar 

  • FTC. (1999). FTC releases revised consumer brochure about “green” claims. Retrieved June 30, 2016, from https://www.ftc.gov/news-events/press-releases/1999/04/ftc-releases-revised-consumer-brochure-about-green-claims.

  • FTC. (2010). Guides for the use of environmental marketing claims: request for public comment on proposed, revised guides (matter no. P954501). Federal Trade Commission. Retrieved May 8, 2017 from https://www.ftc.gov/sites/default/files/documents/federal_register_notices/16-c.f.r.part-260-guides-use-environmental-marketing-claims-request-public-comment-proposed-revised-guides/101015greenguidesfrn.pdf.

  • FTC. (2012). Environmental claims: summary of the green guides. Federal Trade Commission. Retrieved June 21, 2016 from https://www.ftc.gov/sites/default/files/attachments/press-releases/ftc-issues-revised-green-guides/greenguidessummary.pdf.

  • FTC. (2013). FTC cracks down on misleading and unsubstantiated environmental marketing claims. Federal Trade Commission. Retrieved June 21, 2016, from https://www.ftc.gov/news-events/press-releases/2013/10/ftc-cracks-down-misleading-unsubstantiated-environmental.

  • Genpak (2016). What biodegradable and compostable packaging really means. Retrieved June 30, 2016, from http://www.genpak.com/green-room/biodegradable/.

  • Golan, E., & Unnevehr, L. (2008). Food product composition, consumer health, and public policy: Introduction and overview of special section. Food Policy, 33(6), 465–469.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Greene, J. (2007). Biodegradation of compostable plastics in green yard-waste compost environment. Journal of Polymers and the Environment, 15(4), 269–273.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Gruère, G. P. (2015). An analysis of the growth in environmental labelling and information schemes. Journal of Consumer Policy, 38(1), 1–18.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Heritage Pioneer Corporate Group. (2016). The difference between biodegradable and compostable packaging materials. Retrieved June 30, 2016, from http://www.hpcorporategroup.com/the-difference-between-biodegradable-and-compostable-packaging-materials.html.

  • Hulland, J., Todiño, H. S., Jr., & Lecraw, D. J. (1996). Country-of-origin effects on sellers’ price premiums in competitive Philippine markets. Journal of International Marketing, 4(1), 57–79.

    Google Scholar 

  • Innocenti, F. D. (2003). Biodegradability and compostability. In E. Chiellini & R. Solaro (Eds.), Biodegradable polymers and plastics (pp. 33–45). Boston: Springer.

  • Ippolito, P. M., & Mathios, A. D. (1990). The regulation of science-based claims in advertising. Journal of Consumer Policy, 13(4), 413–445.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Johansson, J. K., Douglas, S. P., & Nonaka, I. (1985). Assessing the impact of country of origin on product evaluations: a new methodological perspective. Journal of Marketing Research, 22(4), 388–396.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Kangun, N., & Polonsky, M. J. (1995). Regulation of environmental marketing claims: a comparative perspective. International Journal of Advertising, 14(1), 1–24.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Knoblauch, J. A. (2009). Plastic not-so-fantastic: how the versatile material harms the environment and human health. Retrieved June 21, 2016, from http://www.scientificamerican.com/article/plastic-not-so-fantastic/.

  • Kotler, P. (2011). Reinventing marketing to manage the environmental imperative. Journal of Marketing, 75(4), 132–135.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Lähteenmäki, L., Lampila, P., Grunert, K., Boztug, Y., Ueland, Ø., Åström, A., & Martinsdóttir, E. (2010). Impact of health-related claims on the perception of other product attributes. Food Policy, 35(3), 230–239.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Lampert, S. I., & Jaffe, E. D. (1998). A dynamic approach to country-of-origin effect. European Journal of Marketing, 32(1/2), 61–78.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Larceneux, F., Benoit-Moreau, F., & Renaudin, V. (2012). Why might organic labels fail to influence consumer choices? Marginal labelling and brand equity effects. Journal of Consumer Policy, 35(1), 85–104.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Laroche, M., Bergeron, J., & Barbaro-Forleo, G. (2001). Targeting consumers who are willing to pay more for environmentally friendly products. Journal of Consumer Marketing, 18(6), 503–520.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Lee, W. J., Shimizu, M., Kniffin, K. M., & Wansink, B. (2013). You taste what you see: do organic labels bias taste perceptions? Food Quality and Preference, 29(1), 33–39.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Levis, J. W., & Barlaz, M. A. (2011). Is biodegradability a desirable attribute for discarded solid waste? Perspectives from a national landfill greenhouse gas inventory model. Environmental Science & Technology, 45(13), 5470–5476.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Lin, Y.-C., & Chang, C. A. (2012). Double standard: the role of environmental consciousness in green product usage. Journal of Marketing, 76(5), 125–134.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Lundblad, L., & Davies, I. A. (2016). The values and motivations behind sustainable fashion consumption. Journal of Consumer Behaviour, 15(2), 149–162.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Lyon, T. P., & Montgomery, A. W. (2015). The means and end of greenwash. Organization & Environment, 28(2), 223–249.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Macera, J. (2011). What “biodegradable” really means. excellence in manufacturing consortium. Retrieved June 29, 2016 from https://www.emccanada.org/blogs/emcchatham/whatbiodegradablereallymeans.

  • Marteau, T. M., Ogilvie, D., Roland, M., & Suhrcke, M. (2012). Judging nudging: can nudging improve population health? British Medical Journal, 29(January), 263–265.

    Google Scholar 

  • McDaniel, S. W., & Rylander, D. H. (1993). Strategic green marketing. Journal of Consumer Marketing, 10(3), 4–10.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Meise, J. N., Rudolph, T., Kenning, P., & Phillips, D. M. (2014). Feed them facts: value perceptions and consumer use of sustainability-related product information. Journal of Retailing and Consumer Services, 21(4), 510–519.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Menon, A., Menon, A., Chowdhury, J., & Jankovich, J. (1999). Evolving paradigm for environmental sensitivity in marketing programs: a synthesis of theory and practice. Journal of Marketing Theory and Practice, 7(2), 1–15.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Merriam-Dictionary. (2016). Definition of biodegradable. Retrieved June 21, 2016, from http://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/biodegradable.

  • Mobley, A. S., Painter, T. S., Untch, E. M., & Rao Unnava, H. (1995). Consumer evaluation of recycled products. Psychology and Marketing, 12(3), 165–176.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Moser, A. K. (2016). Consumers’ purchasing decisions regarding environmentally friendly products: an empirical analysis of German consumers. Journal of Retailing and Consumer Services, 31, 389–397. doi:10.1016/j.jretconser.2016.05.006.

  • Nedović, V., Raspor, P., Lević, J., Šaponjac, V. T., & Barbosa-Cánovas, G. V. (2015). Emerging and traditional technologies for safe, healthy and quality food. Cham: Springer International.

    Google Scholar 

  • Newman, G. E., Gorlin, M., & Dhar, R. (2014). When going green backfires: how firm intentions shape the evaluation of socially beneficial product enhancements. Journal of Consumer Research, 41(3), 823–839. doi:10.1086/677841.

  • OECD. (2011). Environmental claims: findings and conclusions of the OECD committee on consumer policy. Organization for Economic Co-operation and Development. Retrieved June 21, 2016 from https://www.oecd.org/sti/consumer/48127506.pdf

  • Olsen, M. C., Slotegraaf, R. J., & Chandukala, S. R. (2014). Green claims and message frames: how green new products change brand attitude. Journal of Marketing, 78(5), 119–137.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Pape, J., Rau, H., Fahy, F., & Davies, A. (2011). Developing policies and instruments for sustainable household consumption: Irish experiences and futures. Journal of Consumer Policy, 34(1), 25–42.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Pinto, D. C., Herter, M. M., Rossi, P., & Borges, A. (2014). Going green for self or for others? Gender and identity salience effects on sustainable consumption: Gender, identities and sustainable consumption. International Journal of Consumer Studies, 38(5), 540–549.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Polonsky, M. J., Carlson, L., Grove, S., & Kangun, N. (1997). International environmental marketing claims: real changes or simple posturing? International Marketing Review, 14(4), 218–232.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Rana, S., Pichandi, S., Parveen, S., & Fangueiro, R. (2014). Biodegradation studies of textiles and clothing products. In S. S. Muthu (Ed.), Roadmap to sustainable textiles and clothing: environmental and social aspects of textiles and clothing supply chain (pp. 88–123). New York: Springer.

    Google Scholar 

  • Rathje, W. L., & Murphy, C. (2001). Rubbish!: the archaeology of garbage. Tucson: University of Arizona Press Retrieved June 30, 2016 from https://books.google.com/books?hl=en&lr=&id=1i_B1c573OQC&oi=fnd&pg=PA124&dq=Rubbish&ots=DmEZizkjPS&sig=0n5kvffcpqg1zStCqJpLl5qqE_k#v=onepage&q=the%20truth&f=false.

  • Rice, G. (1990). Being green: U.S. marketers begin to respond. Academy of Marketing Science News, (April), 5.

  • Roe, B., Levy, A. S., & Derby, B. M. (1999). The impact of health claims on consumer search and product evaluation outcomes: results from FDA experimental data. Journal of Public Policy & Marketing, 18(1), 89–105.

  • Roozen, I. T. M., & De Pelsmacker, P. (2000). Polish and Belgian consumers’ perception of environmentally friendly behaviour. Journal of Consumer Studies and Home Economics, 24(1), 9–21.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Roozen, I. T. M., & De Pelsmacker, P. (1998). Attributes of environmentally friendly consumer behavior. Journal of International Consumer Marketing, 10(3), 21–41.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Rozin, P. (2005). The meaning of “natural”: process more important than content. Psychological Science, 16(8), 652–658.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Rozin, P., Spranca, M., Krieger, Z., Neuhaus, R., Surillo, D., Swerdlin, A., & Wood, K. (2004). Preference for natural: instrumental and ideational/moral motivations, and the contrast between foods and medicines. Appetite, 43(2), 147–154.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Salazar, H. A., & Oerlemans, L. (2015). Do we follow the leader or the masses? Antecedents of the willingness to pay extra for eco-products. Journal of Consumer Affairs, 50(2), 286–314.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Schuldt, J. P., & Hannahan, M. (2013). When good deeds leave a bad taste. Negative inferences from ethical food claims. Appetite, 62(1), 76–83.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Schuldt, J. P., Muller, D., & Schwarz, N. (2012). The “fair trade” effect: health halos from social ethics claims. Social Psychological and Personality Science, 3(5), 581–589.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Schuldt, J. P., & Schwarz, N. (2010). The “organic” path to obesity? Organic claims influence calorie judgments and exercise recommendations. Judgment and Decision making, 5(3), 144.

    Google Scholar 

  • Schwepker, C. H., & Cornwell, T. B. (1991). An examination of ecologically concerned consumers and their intention to purchase ecologically packaged products. Journal of Public Policy & Marketing, 10(2), 77–101.

    Google Scholar 

  • Scott, L., & Vigar-Ellis, D. (2014). Consumer understanding, perceptions and behaviours with regard to environmentally friendly packaging in a developing nation: Perceptions of environmentally friendly packaging. International Journal of Consumer Studies, 38(6), 642–649.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Sörqvist, P., Haga, A., Holmgren, M., & Hansla, A. (2015a). An eco-label effect in the built environment: performance and comfort effects of labeling a light source environmentally friendly. Journal of Environmental Psychology, 42, 123–127.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Sörqvist, P., Haga, A., Langeborg, L., Holmgren, M., Wallinder, M., Nöstl, A., & Marsh, J. E. (2015b). The green halo: mechanisms and limits of the eco-label effect. Food Quality and Preference, 43, 1–9.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Staff. (2014). Biodegradable plastics market to be worth $3.47 billion by 2019. Retrieved June 21, 2016, from http://www.processingmagazine.com/processing-e-news/biodegradable-plastics-market-to-be-worth-3-47-billion-by-2019/.

  • Sundar, A., & Kardes, F. R. (2015). The role of perceived variability and the health halo effect in nutritional inference and consumption: nutritional inference. Psychology & Marketing, 32(5), 512–521.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Sundar, A., & Kellaris, J. J. (2015). Blue-washing the green halo. In R. Batra, C. M. Seifert, & D. Brei (Eds.), The psychology of design: Creating consumer appeal (pp. 63–74). New York: Routledge.

    Google Scholar 

  • Sütterlin, B., & Siegrist, M. (2015). Simply adding the word “fruit” makes sugar healthier: The misleading effect of symbolic information on the perceived healthiness of food. Appetite, 95(1), 252–261.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Thorndike, E. L. (1920). A constant error in psychological ratings. Journal of Applied Psychology, 4(1), 25–29.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • USDA. (2016). Poisonous plant research: home. Retrieved June 30, 2016, from http://www.ars.usda.gov/main/site_main.htm?modecode=20-80-15-00.

  • van Trijp, H. C. M., & van der Lans, I. A. (2007). Consumer perceptions of nutrition and health claims. Appetite, 48(3), 305–324.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Wansink, B., & Chandon, P. (2006). Can “low-fat” nutrition labels lead to obesity? Journal of Marketing Research, 43(4), 605–617.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Wasik, J. F. (2009). The green supermarket shopping guide. New York: Grand Central Publishing.

    Google Scholar 

  • Weinzierl, A. J. (2015). FTC fails to prove green guides’ meaning of biodegradable. Retrieved June 21, 2016, from http://www.natlawreview.com/article/ftc-fails-to-prove-green-guides-meaning-biodegradable.

  • Whitson, D., Ozkaya, H. E., & Roxas, J. (2014). Changes in consumer segments and preferences to green labelling: consumer preferences to green labelling. International Journal of Consumer Studies, 38(5), 458–466.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Williams, P. (2005). Consumer understanding and use of health claims for foods. Nutrition Reviews, 63(7), 256–264. doi:10.1111/j.1753-4887.2005.tb00382.x.

  • Yue, C., Hall, C. R., Behe, B. K., Campbell, B. L., Dennis, J. H., & Lopez, R. G. (2010). Are consumers willing to pay more for biodegradable containers than for plastic ones? Evidence from hypothetical conjoint analysis and nonhypothetical experimental auctions. Journal of Agricultural and Applied Economics, 42(4), 757–772.

    Article  Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Goddard School of Business and Economics, Weber State University, 1337 Edvalson St, Ogden, UT, 84408, USA

    Clinton Amos, Anthony Allred & Lixuan Zhang

Authors
  1. Clinton Amos
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. Anthony Allred
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  3. Lixuan Zhang
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Clinton Amos.

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Check for updates. Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this article

Amos, C., Allred, A. & Zhang, L. Do Biodegradable Labels Lead to an Eco-safety Halo Effect?. J Consum Policy 40, 279–298 (2017). https://doi.org/10.1007/s10603-017-9355-y

Download citation

  • Received:

  • Accepted:

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s10603-017-9355-y

Keywords

Search

Navigation