SynthesisNutrients2021
The Impact of Environmental Sustainability Labels on Willingness-to-Pay for Foods: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis of Discrete Choice Experiments.
Synthesis in Nutrients, 2021. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 13 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
13 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it.
- A systematic review on how environmental sustainability and social responsibility food labels influence consumers' food choices and purchasing decisions.Public health nutrition · 2026Pooled it
- Greenwashing and Green Marketing on Social Media: Implications for Trust-Related Reactions in the Food Sector.Foods (Basel, Switzerland) · 2026Article
- How Do We Know What We Know About Consumer Attitudes Towards Meat Sustainability? A Scoping Review of Studies Published Globally Between 2010-2022.Current environmental health reports · 2025Article
- Green Extraction of Bioactive Compounds from Plant-Based Agri-Food Residues: Advances Toward Sustainable Valorization.Plants (Basel, Switzerland) · 2025Review
- Trends in Organic Food Choices and Consumption: Assessing the Purchasing Behaviour of Consumers in Greece.Foods (Basel, Switzerland) · 2025Article
- Review
- Strengths and weaknesses of food eco-labeling: a review.Frontiers in nutrition · 2024Review
- The impact of health and environmental messaging with and without product filtering in complex retail markets: the case of pulses.Frontiers in nutrition · 2024Article
- Consumer Interaction with Sustainability Labelling on Food Products: A Narrative Literature Review.Nutrients · 2023Review
- Meat Consumption, Sustainability and Alternatives: An Overview of Motives and Barriers.Foods (Basel, Switzerland) · 2023Review
- Impact of Health, Environmental, and Animal Welfare Messages Discouraging Red Meat Consumption: An Online Randomized Experiment.Journal of the Academy of Nutrition and Dietetics · 2023Article
- Seafood Choice and Consumption Behavior: Assessing the Willingness to Pay for an Edible Sea Urchin.Foods (Basel, Switzerland) · 2023Article
- Dietitians Australia position statement on healthy and sustainable diets.Nutrition & dietetics : the journal of the Dietitians Association of Australia · 2022Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
9 authors.
Funding
Abstract
Food production is a major contributor to environmental damage. More environmentally sustainable foods could incur higher costs for consumers. In this review, we explore whether consumers are willing to pay (WTP) more for foods with environmental sustainability labels ('ecolabels'). Six electronic databases were searched for experiments on consumers' willingness to pay for ecolabelled food. Monetary values were converted to Purchasing Power Parity dollars and adjusted for country-specific inflation. Studies were meta-analysed and effect sizes with confidence intervals were calculated for the whole sample and for pre-specified subgroups defined as meat-dairy, seafood, and fruits-vegetables-nuts. Meta-regressions tested the role of label attributes and demographic characteristics on participants' WTP. Forty-three discrete choice experiments (DCEs) with 41,777 participants were eligible for inclusion. Thirty-five DCEs (n = 35,725) had usable data for the meta-analysis. Participants were willing to pay a premium of 3.79 PPP$/kg (95%CI 2.7, 4.89,
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.