Vox Pop: Can consumers tell the difference between sustainable cocoa labels?

Loading the player...

Many consumers struggle to tell the difference between cocoa certification program labels like Fairtrade and company own labels, such as Nestlé’s Cocoa Plan, but all agree social responsibility should be a priority for chocolate makers.

ConfectioneryNews surveyed consumers at a indoor specialty food market in downtown Chicago after Theo Chocolate’s co-founder, Debra Music warned that greenwashing was a challenge in the premium chocolate sector.

They were shown sustainable cocoa labels such as those from Fairtrade, Fairtrade USA, Nestlé's Cocoa Plan and Mondelez's Cocoa Life.

Certify agents’ concern: which labels are credible?

Most shoppers said sustainability logos mean positive living and working condition for cocoa farmers, but hardly any of them knew how to tell which labels were credible.

Understanding what labels stand for can often be “a real challenge” for consumers in many countries, UTZ’s executive director, Han de Groot, told ConfectioneryNews.

UTZ is one of the largest cocoa sustainability certifying organizations in the world.

“This situation often creates confusion and can also lower the public trust in labels,” he said.

“Take for instance The Netherlands. There are so many labels that the Ministry of Economic Affairs recently commissioned a new study of 90 labels and food brands, ranking them on their sustainability requirements, transparency and control processes.

The study named the 11 top food labels that meet a strict set of criteria and can be seen as credible and trustworthy.”

However, the study shows that the number of credible labels is not as large as often perceived, Groot added.

ISEAL membership

Most of the top 11 are ISEAL Alliance members, he said. ISEAL is an organization for sustainability standards which sets out global references, called the ISEAL Codes of Good Practice, for what credibility in standards and certification looks like.

In addition to UTZ, other ISEAL full members also include Fairtrade International and Rainforest Alliance, according to ISEAL’s website.

Perhaps not coincidentally, those are the labels consumers told ConfectioneryNews they recognize the most.

“I believe the market, industry and consumer organizations should take these findings seriously, and use labels that are really trustworthy when making sustainability claims,” Groot said. “…We encourage the governments of all the countries with many food labels to follow the Dutch example.”

Fair Trade label recognition

Research earlier this year by Fair Trade USA and Natural Marketing Institute suggested over half of consumers recognize the Fair Trade Certified label, compared to 38% in 2012. The percentage is even higher among Millennials.

But the consumers we surveyed said a sustainable cocoa label was only one of several factors impacting their purchase decisions, which including flavor and health benefits.

Many said they would buy the chocolate if a sustainability label appears on the front of the packaging rather than the back, because it is more noticeable.

“I would definitely pay [a premium price] for chocolate that carry sustainability labels, because they are better quality,” one consumers said.

How to prevent greenwashing?

The responses suggest consumers are confused whether sustainability labels are about cocoa farmers or merely a marketing plan for their own companies.

Groot suggested that the proliferation of dubious labels and claims can be prevented by agreeing on minimum requirements that sustainability labels should meet.

“One of the simplest ways to divide the credible sustainability standards from the rest is ISEAL membership,” he said. “UTZ is a member of ISEAL and supports the ISEAL campaign, ‘Challenge the Label,’ an essential tool for any claims users to detangle credible from non-credible claims.”

Third party certify agent or company’s own sustainability program?

Cadbury’s recent move to use Mondelēz’s own Cocoa Life program label after the company teamed up with Fairtrade to expand its sustainability program has drawn some criticism from the chocolate industry, as some said it may put the Fairtrade model at risk.

When it comes to the distinction between company projects and third-party certification, Groot said UTZ and other certification programs have very strict rules about how the label can be used by companies, the extra information that must be provided on pack, and so on.

“Making a clear distinction between company projects and third party certified sustainability programs helps prevent greenwashing accusations, which seriously damage company reputation and credibility, as well as the sector as a whole,” he said.

“Almost all the major players in the chocolate industry have made commitments towards sustainability and sourcing sustainable cocoa, which is of course a very welcomed trend considering that overall cocoa production is far from being sustainable,” Groot said.

“On the Cadbury’s Fairtrade announcement, it’s not really possible for UTZ to comment until we see the details and how it develops,” he added.

[Additional reporting by Mary Ellen Shoup]

Related News

Eleven volunteers from Hershey recently visited Manila Daycare Center V and VI in Baseco, consisting of 195 children.  Photo: Hershey

Hershey expands social program globally, gaining snacking and flavor insights

Chocolate industry leader believes cocoa sustainability is usually a tool for chocolate companies to build brand image. Pic: ©iStock/dimarik

Consumer’s confusion over sustainability labels spurs outcry among cocoa industry leaders

Anellotech is expected to open its first commercial plant by the end of decade. Pic: Anellotech

Anellotech to increase confectioners’ sustainable packaging with Bio-TCat

Divine’s CEO Sophi Tranchell (pictured) said most chocolate companies certified by B Corps are small to medium sized. Photo:Divine

Divine Chocolate joins Tony’s Chocolonely as B Corps certified company

Each Yowie's chocolate egg contains a toy of a endangered animal or a Yowie character.  Photo: Yowie Group

Yowie re-enters Australia and signs wildlife conservation deal

©iStock

UK can be leader or laggard on fair trade post Brexit

Co-op UK to support women's leadership program as cocoa in own label brands goes Fairtrade. Photo: Co-op

Co-op UK to source 100% Fairtrade cocoa under hybrid model for retailers

Cocoa farmers are expected to see increased savings upon merger between UTZ and Rainforest Alliance. Photo: UTZ

UTZ and Rainforest Alliance merger to set cocoa sustainability standards

Western Europe is expected to remain the largest region globally for cocoa ingredients.  Photo: ©iStock/AndreyGorulko

Chocolate confectionery contributes most to value sales of sustainable cocoa products: Euromonitor

ICI and UTZ say declining cocoa prices may increase the risk of child labor.  Photo: UTZ

More child labor prevention needed as cocoa prices fall, warn UTZ and ICI

The global cocoa sector is some distance from full sustainability despite significant progress, say chocolate makers, cocoa processors, governments and NGOs.

Cocoa sector remains ‘far from’ from sustainable

The company plans to build new farmer teaching facilities

Barry Callebaut ramps up Indonesia cocoa sustainability program

Confectionery accounts for only 1% of food with a sustainable palm oil label

Confectionery accounts for 1% of food with sustainable palm oil label

Related Products

See more related products

Comments (2)

Erika - 07 Dec 2016 | 04:40

Free chocolate App

This is a great app to use when buying chocolate not sourced from the worst forms of child labor, including slavery. Read more and download here: bit.ly/FEPchocolate

07-Dec-2016 at 04:40 GMT

Marc Donaldson - 06 Dec 2016 | 07:26

Can consumers tell the difference between sustainable cocoa labels

Dear Douglas, Having watched the video 3 times, the clear answer is no, despite your opening statements. Only 2 of the respondents had any clue as to what they were talking about (this is not 50%). Non GMO is not a sustainability label, although several thought it was. Only 2 respondents clearly said they would pay more, and nearly everyone pushed the responsibility to the manufacturers, and did not take it on themselves, which is the only way we will succeed. This shows that after 10 years, and 100 of millions of dollars of investment, we as an industry have achieved so little. We should be ashamed at the lack of improvement, and co-operation between us.

06-Dec-2016 at 07:26 GMT

Submit a comment

Your comment has been saved

Post a comment

Please note that any information that you supply is protected by our Privacy and Cookie Policy. Access to all documents and request for further information are available to all users at no costs, In order to provide you with this free service, William Reed Business Media SAS does share your information with companies that have content on this site. When you access a document or request further information from this site, your information maybe shared with the owners of that document or information.