Reading time: 2 minutes
Ms Moritz, the work of your association revolves around the ‘added value’ and environmental costs of products. Why is this approach necessary in the first place?
It's necessary because prices today only tell part of the story. In many cases, the environmental impact of products – on the climate, biodiversity or soil, for example – isn't reflected in the retail price. Our aim is to highlight these impacts and provide both businesses and consumers with a sounder decision-making basis.
You mentioned environmental costs. Does that automatically mean that more sustainable products will be more expensive?
Not necessarily. It very much depends on the product. Some companies can offset environmental costs through more efficient processes or mitigating measures without having to raise prices significantly. Other products will inevitably become more expensive in the long run. The bottom line is that sustainability shouldn't be a competitive disadvantage.
How does the focus on ‘true costs’ influence the debate about plant-based versus animal-based products?
Today, animal products impact the environment in ways that are borne by society rather than being reflected in their price. If environmental costs were consistently made clearer or factored into pricing, many plant-based products would be significantly more competitive. Studies have already shown that many plant-based products would become only marginally more expensive, while conventional meat products would be significantly more affected.
Does this mean that food prices will inevitably rise in the future?
In my view, the issue is more complex than that. It is not just a question of whether food is becoming more expensive, but of how prices are determined. Modern consumers are often completely unaware of the factors affecting the price of a given product – from advertising to environmental impacts. Greater transparency could help people understand why some products are more expensive and whether that price is justified.
Can a label actually influence consumer behaviour?
I think so, yes, as long as it’s easy to understand. People make better decisions when they can absorb information intuitively. We, therefore, strive to present environmental impacts in a way that is easy to understand.
What does it take for this approach to work?
Businesses need practical tools to measure and reduce the impact their products have on the environment. And consumers need to be able to understand why prices change. At the same time, policy incentives are necessary to ensure that more sustainable products are not at a competitive disadvantage.
Your conclusion in a nutshell?
There can be no fair competition for sustainable food as long as environmental costs remain unseen.
