Skip to main content

Thank you for visiting nature.com. You are using a browser version with limited support for CSS. To obtain the best experience, we recommend you use a more up to date browser (or turn off compatibility mode in Internet Explorer). In the meantime, to ensure continued support, we are displaying the site without styles and JavaScript.

  • Review Article
  • Published:

Revisiting the promise of carbon labelling

Nature Climate Change volume 12, pages 132–140 (2022)Cite this article

Subjects

Abstract

Carbon labelling systems can inform individual and organizational choices, which potentially reduce the carbon footprints of goods and services. We review the ways labelling is conceptualized and operationalized, and the available evidence on effectiveness. The literature focuses mainly on how labelling affects retail consumer behaviour, but much less on how labelling affects the behaviour of the organizations that produce, transport and sell products despite preliminary research suggesting that the effects on corporate behaviour may be substantial even without strong consumer responses. We consider key challenges for carbon labelling systems related to standard setting, data collection and use, and label design. We summarize the available knowledge, identify key research questions and identify steps towards achieving the promise of carbon labelling.

This is a preview of subscription content, access via your institution

Access options

Buy this article

  • Purchase on Springer Link
  • Instant access to full article PDF
Buy now

Prices may be subject to local taxes which are calculated during checkout

Fig. 1: Illustrative examples of resolution levels offered by carbon labels.

Similar content being viewed by others

References

  1. Emissions Gap Report 2020 (UNEP, 2020); https://www.unep.org/emissions-gap-report-2020

  2. Vandenbergh, M. P., Dietz, T. & Stern, P. C. Time to try carbon labelling. Nat. Clim. Change 1, 4–6 (2011).

    Article  Google Scholar 

  3. Nielsen, K. S. et al. Improving climate change mitigation analysis: a framework for examining feasibility. One Earth 3, 325–336 (2020).

    Article  Google Scholar 

  4. Goulder, L. H. Timing is everything: how economists can better address the urgency of stronger climate policy. Rev. Environ. Econ. Policy 14, 143–156 (2020).

    Article  Google Scholar 

  5. Vandenbergh, M. P. & Gilligan, J. M. Beyond Politics (Cambridge Univ. Press, 2017).

  6. Peng, W. et al. Climate policy models need to get real about people—here’s how. Nature 594, 174–176 (2021).

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  7. Dietz, T., Gardner, G. T., Gilligan, J., Stern, P. C. & Vandenbergh, M. P. Household actions can provide a behavioral wedge to rapidly reduce US carbon emissions. Proc. Natl Acad. Sci. USA 106, 18452–18456 (2009).

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  8. Feucht, Y. & Zander, K. Consumers’ preferences for carbon labels and the underlying reasoning. A mixed methods approach in 6 European countries. J. Clean. Prod. 178, 740–748 (2018).

    Article  Google Scholar 

  9. Gardner, G. T. & Stern, P. C. Environmental Problems and Human Behavior (Allyn & Bacon, 1996).

  10. Meyerding, S. G. H., Schaffmann, A. L. & Lehberger, M. Consumer preferences for different designs of carbon footprint labelling on tomatoes in Germany–does design matter? Sustainability 11, 1587 (2019).

    Article  Google Scholar 

  11. Stern, P. C. et al. The effectiveness of incentives for residential energy conservation. Eval. Rev. 10, 147–176 (1986).

    Article  Google Scholar 

  12. Wolske, K. S. & Stern, P. C. in Psychology and Climate Change (eds Clayton, S. & Manning, C.) 127–160 (Academic, 2018).

  13. Attari, S. Z., Dekay, M. L., Davidson, C. I., Bruine, W. & Bruin, D. Public perceptions of energy consumption and savings. Proc. Natl Acad. Sci. USA 107, 16054–16059 (2010).

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  14. Camilleri, A. R., Larrick, R. P., Hossain, S. & Patino-Echeverri, D. Consumers underestimate the emissions associated with food but are aided by labels. Nat. Clim. Change 9, 53–58 (2019).

    Article  Google Scholar 

  15. Marghetis, T., Attari, S. Z. & Landy, D. Simple interventions can correct misperceptions of home energy use. Nat. Energy 10, 874–881 (2019).

    Article  Google Scholar 

  16. Kantenbacher, J. & Attari, S. Z. Better rules for judging joules: exploring how experts make decisions about household energy use. Energy Res. Soc. Sci. 73, 101911 (2021).

    Article  Google Scholar 

  17. Rosa, E. A. et al. Nuclear waste: knowledge waste? Science 329, 762–763 (2010).

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  18. Anderson, K. & Peters, G. P. The trouble with negative emissions. Science 354, 182–183 (2016).

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  19. Creutzig, F. et al. Considering sustainability thresholds for BECCS in IPCC and biodiversity assessments. GCB Bioenergy 13, 510–515 (2021).

    Article  Google Scholar 

  20. Carton, W., Asiyanbi, A. P., Beck, S., Buck, H. J. & Lund, J. F. Negative emissions and the long history of carbon removal. WIREs Clim. Change e671, 1–25 (2020).

    Google Scholar 

  21. Torma, G. & Thøgersen, J. A systematic literature review on meta sustainability labeling—what do we (not) know? J. Clean. Prod. 23, 126194 (2021).

    Article  Google Scholar 

  22. Sarti, S., Darnall, N. & Testa, F. Market segmentation of consumers based on their actual sustainability and health-related purchases. J. Clean. Prod. 192, 270–280 (2018).

    Article  Google Scholar 

  23. Schuitema, G., Aravena, C. & Denny, E. The psychology of energy efficiency labels: trust, involvement, and attitudes towards energy performance certificates in Ireland. Energy Res. Soc. Sci. 59, 101301 (2020).

    Article  Google Scholar 

  24. Brécard, D. Consumer confusion over the profusion of eco-labels: lessons from a double differentiation model. Resour. Energy Econ. 37, 64–84 (2014).

    Article  Google Scholar 

  25. Janßen, D. & Langen, N. The bunch of sustainability labels—do consumers differentiate? J. Clean. Prod. 143, 1233–1245 (2017).

    Article  Google Scholar 

  26. Bullock, G. Independent labels? The power behind environmental information about products and companies. Polit. Res. Q. 68, 46–62 (2015).

    Article  Google Scholar 

  27. Shwom, R. L. in The Politics of Energy (ed. Vanderheiden, S.) 107–128 (Routledge, 2013).

  28. Darnall, N., Ji, H. & Potoski, M. Institutional design of ecolabels: sponsorship signals rule strength. Regul. Gov. 11, 438–450 (2017).

    Article  Google Scholar 

  29. Bullock, G. Green Grades: Can Information Save the Earth? (MIT Press, 2017).

  30. York, J. G., Vedula, S. & Lenox, M. J. It’s not easy building green: the impact of public policy, private actors, and regional logics on voluntary standards adoption. Acad. Manag. J. 61, 1492–1523 (2018).

    Article  Google Scholar 

  31. Liu, T., Wang, Q. & Su, B. A review of carbon labeling: standards, implementation, and impact. Renew. Sustain. Energy Rev. 53, 68–79 (2016).

    Article  Google Scholar 

  32. Product Carbon Footprint Label (Carbon Trust, 2021); https://www.carbontrust.com/what-we-do/assurance-and-certification/product-carbon-footprint-label

  33. Matisoff, D. C., Noonan, D. S. & Mazzolini, A. M. Performance or marketing benefits? The case of LEED certification. Environ. Sci. Technol. 48, 2001–2007 (2014).

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  34. Gadema, Z. & Oglethorpe, D. The use and usefulness of carbon labelling food: a policy perspective from a survey of UK supermarket shoppers. Food Policy 36, 815–822 (2011).

    Article  Google Scholar 

  35. Thøgersen, J. & Nielsen, K. S. A better carbon footprint label. J. Clean. Prod. 125, 86–94 (2016).

    Article  Google Scholar 

  36. Marteau, T. M. Towards environmentally sustainable human behaviour: targeting non-conscious and conscious processes for effective and acceptable policies. Phil. Trans. R. Soc. A 375, 20160371 (2017).

    Article  Google Scholar 

  37. Hollands, G. J. et al. The TIPPME intervention typology for changing environments to change behaviour. Nat. Hum. Behav. 1, 1040 (2017).

    Article  Google Scholar 

  38. Eijgelaar, E., Nawijn, J., Barten, C., Okuhn, L. & Dijkstra, L. Consumer attitudes and preferences on holiday carbon footprint information in the Netherlands. J. Sustain. Tour. 24, 398–411 (2016).

    Article  Google Scholar 

  39. Kortelainen, M., Raychaudhuri, J. & Roussillon, B. Effects of carbon reduction labels: evidence from scanner data. Econ. Inq. 54, 1167–1187 (2016).

    Article  Google Scholar 

  40. Cohen, M. A. & Viscusi, W. K. The role of information disclosure in climate mitigation policy. Clim. Change Econ. 3, 1250020 (2012).

    Article  Google Scholar 

  41. Plambeck, E. L. Reducing greenhouse gas emissions through operations and supply chain management. Energy Econ. 34, S64–S74 (2012).

    Article  Google Scholar 

  42. Darnall, N. & Aragón-Correa, J. A. Can ecolabels influence firms’ sustainability strategy and stakeholder behavior? Organ. Environ. 27, 319–327 (2014).

    Article  Google Scholar 

  43. Boardman, B. Carbon labelling: too complex or will it transform our buying? Significance 5, 168–171 (2008).

    Article  Google Scholar 

  44. Schaefer, F. & Blanke, M. Opportunities and challenges of carbon footprint, climate or CO2 labelling for horticultural products. Erwerbs-Obstbau 56, 73–80 (2014).

    Article  Google Scholar 

  45. Vaughan, A. Tesco drops carbon-label pledge. The Guardian (30 January 2012); https://www.theguardian.com/environment/2012/jan/30/tesco-drops-carbon-labelling

  46. Zhao, R., Wu, D. & Patti, S. A bibliometric analysis of carbon labeling schemes in the period 2007–2019. Energies 13, 4233 (2020).

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  47. Wu, P., Xia, B. & Zuo, J. Achieving transparency in carbon labelling for construction materials—lessons from current assessment standards and carbon labels. Environ. Sci. Policy 44, 11–25 (2014).

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  48. Gössling, S. & Buckley, R. Carbon labels in tourism: persuasive communication? J. Clean. Prod. 111, 358–369 (2016).

    Article  Google Scholar 

  49. Haq, G. & Weiss, M. CO2 labelling of passenger cars in Europe: status, challenges, and future prospects. Energy Policy 95, 324–335 (2016).

    Article  Google Scholar 

  50. Andor, M. A., Gerster, A. & Götte, L. How effective is the European Union energy label? Evidence from a real-stakes experiment. Environ. Res. Lett. 14, 044001 (2019).

    Article  Google Scholar 

  51. Shewmake, S., Cohen, M. A., Stern, P. C. & Vandenbergh, M. P. in Handbook of Research on Sustainable Consumption (eds Reisch, L. A. & Thøgersen, J.) 285–299 (Edward Elgar, 2015).

  52. Holtermans, R. & Kok, N. On the value of environmental certification in the commercial real estate market. Real. Estate Econ. 47, 685–722 (2019).

    Article  Google Scholar 

  53. Europeans’ Attitudes on EU Energy Policy (European Commission, 2019); https://op.europa.eu/en/publication-detail/-/publication/b891cfb7-d50f-11e9-b4bf-01aa75ed71a1

  54. Cornall, J. Foundation Earth project to debut environmental scores on food labels. Dairy Reporter (29 June 2021); https://www.dairyreporter.com/Article/2021/06/29/Foundation-Earth-project-to-launch-environmental-scores-on-food-products

  55. Iqbal, N. Traffic-light system of ‘eco-scores’ to be piloted on British food labels. The Guardian (27 June 2021); https://www.theguardian.com/business/2021/jun/27/traffic-light-system-of-eco-scores-to-be-piloted-on-british-food-labels

  56. Recommendations of Specifications, Standards, and Ecolabels for Federal Purchasing (US Environmental Protection Agency, 2021); https://www.epa.gov/greenerproducts/epas-recommendations-specifications-standards-and-ecolabels-federal-purchasing-pdf

  57. Tackling the Climate Crisis at Home and Abroad (US Government Publishing Office, 2021); https://www.whitehouse.gov/briefing-room/presidential-actions/2021/01/27/executive-order-on-tackling-the-climate-crisis-at-home-and-abroad/

  58. Isley, S. C., Stern, P. C., Carmichael, S. P., Joseph, K. M. & Arent, D. J. Online purchasing creates opportunities to lower the life cycle carbon footprints of consumer products. Proc. Natl Acad. Sci. USA 113, 9780–9785 (2016).

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  59. Liu, K.-H., Chang, S.-F., Huang, W.-H. & Lu, I.-C. in Technologies and Eco-innovation towards Sustainability I (eds Hu, A. H., Matsumoto, M., Kuo, T. C. & Smith, S.) 15–22 (Springer, 2019).

  60. Potter, C. et al. The effects of environmental sustainability labels on selection, purchase, and consumption of food and drink products: a systematic review. Environ. Behav. 53, 891–925 (2021).

    Article  Google Scholar 

  61. Brunner, F., Kurz, V., Bryngelsson, D. & Hedenus, F. Carbon label at a university restaurant—label implementation and evaluation. Ecol. Econ. 146, 658–667 (2018).

    Article  Google Scholar 

  62. Visschers, V. H. M. & Siegrist, M. Does better for the environment mean less tasty? Offering more climate-friendly meals is good for the environment and customer satisfaction. Appetite 95, 475–483 (2015).

    Article  Google Scholar 

  63. Koistinen, L. et al. The impact of fat content, production methods and carbon footprint information on consumer preferences for minced meat. Food Qual. Prefer. 29, 126–136 (2013).

    Article  Google Scholar 

  64. Echeverría, R., Moreira, V. H., Sepúlveda, C. & Wittwer, C. Willingness to pay for carbon footprint on foods. Br. Food J. 116, 186–196 (2014).

    Article  Google Scholar 

  65. Choisdealbha, A. N., Timmons, S. & Lunn, P. D. Experimental evidence for the effects of emissions charges and efficiency information on consumer car choices. J. Clean. Prod. 254, 120140 (2020).

    Article  Google Scholar 

  66. Slapø, H. B. & Karevold, K. I. Simple eco-labels to nudge customers toward the most environmentally friendly warm dishes: an empirical study in a cafeteria setting. Front. Sustain. Food Syst. 3, 40 (2019).

    Article  Google Scholar 

  67. Meyerding, S. G. H. Consumer preferences for food labels on tomatoes in Germany—a comparison of a quasi-experiment and two stated preference approaches. Appetite 103, 105–112 (2016).

    Article  Google Scholar 

  68. Hornibrook, S., May, C. & Fearne, A. Sustainable development and the consumer: exploring the role of carbon labelling in retail supply chains. Bus. Strategy Environ. 24, 266–276 (2015).

    Article  Google Scholar 

  69. Sammer, K. & Wüstenhagen, R. The influence of eco-labelling on consumer behaviour—results of a discrete choice analysis for washing machines. Bus. Strategy Environ. 15, 185–199 (2006).

    Article  Google Scholar 

  70. Newell, R. G. & Siikamäki, J. Nudging energy efficiency behavior: the role of information labels. J. Assoc. Environ. Resour. Econ. 1, 555–598 (2014).

    Google Scholar 

  71. Stadelmann, M. & Schubert, R. How do different designs of energy labels influence purchases of household appliances? A field study in Switzerland. Ecol. Econ. 144, 112–123 (2018).

    Article  Google Scholar 

  72. Carrero, I., Valor, C., Estela, D. & Labajo, V. Designed to be noticed: a reconceptualization of carbon food labels as warning labels. Sustainability 13, 1581 (2021).

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  73. Babakhani, N., Lee, A. & Dolnicar, S. Carbon labels on restaurant menus: do people pay attention to them? J. Sustain. Tour. 28, 51–68 (2020).

    Article  Google Scholar 

  74. Sharp, A. & Wheeler, M. Reducing householders’ grocery carbon emissions: carbon literacy and carbon label preferences. Australas. Mark. J. 21, 240–249 (2013).

    Article  Google Scholar 

  75. Osman, M. & Thornton, K. Traffic light labelling of meals to promote sustainable consumption and healthy eating. Appetite 138, 60–71 (2019).

    Article  Google Scholar 

  76. Panzone, L. A., Sniehotta, F. F., Comber, R. & Lemke, F. The effect of traffic-light labels and time pressure on estimating kilocalories and carbon footprint of food. Appetite 155, 104794 (2020).

    Article  Google Scholar 

  77. Clarke, N. et al. Impact of health warning labels on selection and consumption of food and alcohol products: systematic review with meta-analysis. Health Psychol. Rev. 15, 430–453 (2021).

    Article  Google Scholar 

  78. Asbridge, S. C. M., Pechey, E., Marteau, T. M. & Hollands, G. J. Effects of pairing health warning labels with energy-dense snack foods on food choice and attitudes: online experimental study. Appetite 160, 105090 (2021).

    Article  Google Scholar 

  79. Heinzle, S. L. & Wüstenhagen, R. Dynamic adjustment of eco-labeling schemes and consumer choice—the revision of the EU energy label as a missed opportunity? Bus. Strategy Environ. 21, 60–70 (2012).

    Article  Google Scholar 

  80. Ölander, F. & Thøgersen, J. Informing versus nudging in environmental policy. J. Consum. Policy 37, 341–356 (2014).

    Article  Google Scholar 

  81. Canavari, M. & Coderoni, S. Green marketing strategies in the dairy sector: consumer‐stated preferences for carbon footprint labels. Strategy Change 28, 233–240 (2019).

    Article  Google Scholar 

  82. Hartikainen, H., Roininen, T., Katajajuuri, J. M. & Pulkkinen, H. Finnish consumer perceptions of carbon footprints and carbon labelling of food products. J. Clean. Prod. 73, 285–293 (2014).

    Article  Google Scholar 

  83. Zhao, R. et al. University students’ purchase intention and willingness to pay for carbon-labeled food products: a purchase decision-making experiment. Int. J. Environ. Res. Public Health 17, 7026 (2020).

    Article  Google Scholar 

  84. Steg, L. Values, norms, and intrinsic motivation to act proenvironmentally. Annu. Rev. Environ. Resour. 41, 277–292 (2016).

    Article  Google Scholar 

  85. Van der Ven, H. Beyond Greenwash: Explaining Credibility in Transnational Eco-labeling (Oxford Univ. Press, 2019).

  86. Kitzmueller, M. & Shimshack, J. Economic perspectives on corporate social responsibility. J. Econ. Lit. 50, 51–84 (2012).

    Article  Google Scholar 

  87. Hoffman, A. J. & Ventresca, M. J. Organizations, Policy and the Natural Environment: Institutional and Strategic Perspectives (Stanford Univ. Press, 2002).

  88. Sullivan, R. The management of greenhouse gas emissions in large European companies. Corp. Soc. Responsib. Environ. Manag. 16, 301–309 (2009).

    Article  Google Scholar 

  89. Csutora, M. & Harangozo, G. Twenty years of carbon accounting and auditing—a review and outlook. Soc. Econ. 39, 459–480 (2017).

    Google Scholar 

  90. da Rosa, F. S., Lunkes, R. J. & Brizzola, M. M. B. Exploring the relationship between internal pressures, greenhouse gas management and performance of Brazilian companies. J. Clean. Prod. 212, 567–575 (2019).

    Article  Google Scholar 

  91. Li, D., Tang, F. & Jiang, J. Does environmental management system foster corporate green innovation? The moderating effect of environmental regulation. Technol. Anal. Strategy Manag. 31, 1242–1256 (2019).

    Article  Google Scholar 

  92. Gatzert, N. The impact of corporate reputation and reputation damaging events on financial performance: empirical evidence from the literature. Eur. Manag. J. 33, 485–499 (2015).

    Article  Google Scholar 

  93. De la Fuente Sabaté, J. M. & de Quevedo Puente, E. Empirical analysis of the relationship between corporate reputation and financial performance: a survey of the literature. Corp. Reput. Rev. 6, 161–177 (2003).

    Article  Google Scholar 

  94. Lee, H. L., O’Marah, K. & John, G. The Chief Supply Chain Officer Report 2012 (SCM World, 2012).

  95. Konar, S. & Cohen, M. A. Information as regulation: the effect of community right to know laws on toxic emissions. J. Environ. Econ. Manag. 32, 109–124 (1997).

    Article  Google Scholar 

  96. Van der Ven, H., Bernstein, S. & Hoffmann, M. Valuing the contributions of nonstate and subnational actors to climate governance. Glob. Environ. Polit. 17, 1–20 (2017).

    Article  Google Scholar 

  97. Shwom, R. & Bruce, A. US non-governmental organizations’ cross-sectoral entrepreneurial strategies in energy efficiency. Reg. Environ. Change 18, 1309–1321 (2018).

    Article  Google Scholar 

  98. Andonova, L. B., Hale, T. N. & Roger, C. B. National policy and transnational governance of climate change: substitutes or complements?. Int. Stud. Q. 61, 253–268 (2017).

    Article  Google Scholar 

  99. Lambin, E. F. & Thorlakson, T. Sustainability standards: interactions between private actors, civil society, and governments. Annu. Rev. Environ. Resour. 43, 369–393 (2018).

    Article  Google Scholar 

  100. Marques, J. C. & Eberlein, B. Grounding transnational business governance: a political‐strategic perspective on government responses in the Global South. Regul. Gov. 15, 1229 (2021).

    Article  Google Scholar 

  101. Cashore, B., Knudson, J. S., Moon, J. & van der Ven, H. Private authority and public policy interactions in global context: governance spheres for problem solving. Regul. Gov. 15, 1166–1182 (2021).

    Article  Google Scholar 

  102. Condon, M. & Ignaciuk, A. Border Carbon Adjustment and International Trade: A Literature Review Working Paper 2013/06 (OECD, 2013).

  103. De Rubens, G. Z., Noel, L. & Sovacool, B. K. Dismissive and deceptive car dealerships create barriers to electric vehicle adoption at the point of sale. Nat. Energy 3, 501–507 (2018).

    Article  Google Scholar 

  104. Gulbrandsen, L. H. Sustainable forestry in Sweden: the effect of competition among private certification schemes. J. Environ. Dev. 14, 338–355 (2005).

    Article  Google Scholar 

  105. Auld, G. Constructing Private Governance (Yale Univ. Press, 2014).

  106. Grabs, J. Selling Sustainability Short?: The Private Governance of Labor and the Environment in the Coffee Sector (Cambridge Univ. Press, 2020).

  107. Screening of websites for “greenwashing”: half of green claims lack evidence. EU Monitor (28 January 2021); https://www.eumonitor.eu/9353000/1/j9vvik7m1c3gyxp/vlfuhgbc38ut?ctx=vhsjhdfktnpb

  108. Transparency to Transformation: A Chain Reaction (CDP, 2021); https://www.cdp.net/en/research/global-reports/transparency-to-transformation

  109. Walmart launches Project Gigaton to reduce emissions in company’s supply chain. Walmart (19 April 2017); https://corporate.walmart.com/newsroom/2017/04/19/walmart-launches-project-gigaton-to-reduce-emissions-in-companys-supply-chain

  110. Marcu, A., Mehling, M. & Cosbey, A. Border Carbon Adjustments in the EU: Issues and Options (ERCST, 2021); https://ercst.org/border-carbon-adjustments-in-the-eu-issues-and-options/

  111. Carbon Border Adjustment Mechanism (European Commission, 2021); https://ec.europa.eu/taxation_customs/green-taxation-0/carbon-border-adjustment-mechanism_en

  112. Tucker, T. N. & Meyer, T. A Green Steel Deal: Towards Pro-jobs, Pro-climate Trans-Atlantic Cooperation on Carbon Border Measures (Roosevelt Institute, 2021); https://rooseveltinstitute.org/publications/a-green-steel-deal-towards-pro-jobs-pro-climate-trans-atlantic-cooperation-on-carbon-border-measure/

  113. Busch, L. Standards: Recipes for Reality (MIT Press, 2011).

  114. National Research Council Public Participation in Environmental Assessment and Decision Making (National Academies Press, 2008); https://doi.org/10.17226/12434

  115. Henry, A. D. The challenge of learning for sustainability: a prolegomenon to theory. Hum. Ecol. Rev. 16, 131–140 (2009).

    Google Scholar 

  116. Quantifying the Greenhouse Gas Emissions of Products: PAS 2050 and the GHG Protocol Product Standard (BSi & Greenhouse Gas Protocol, 2021); https://ghgprotocol.org/sites/default/files/standards_supporting/GHG%20Protocol%20PAS%202050%20Factsheet.pdf

  117. Cialdini, R. B. Influence: The Psychology of Persuasion (Collins, 2007).

  118. Brazil, W., Kallbekken, S., Sælen, H. & Carroll, J. The role of fuel cost information in new car sales. Transp. Res. D 74, 93–103 (2019).

    Article  Google Scholar 

  119. Codagnone, C. et al. Labels as nudges? An experimental study of car eco-labels. Econ. Polit. 33, 403–432 (2016).

    Article  Google Scholar 

  120. Andor, M. A., Gerster, A., Gillingham, K. T. & Horvath, M. Running a car costs much more than people think—stalling the uptake of green travel. Nature 580, 453–455 (2020).

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  121. Galarraga, I., Kallbekken, S. & Silvestri, A. Consumer purchases of energy-efficient cars: how different labelling schemes could affect consumer response to price changes. Energy Policy 137, 111181 (2020).

    Article  Google Scholar 

  122. Hille, S. L., Geiger, C., Loock, M. & Peloza, J. Best in class or simply the best? The impact of absolute versus relative ecolabeling approaches. J. Public Policy Mark. 37, 5–22 (2018).

    Article  Google Scholar 

  123. Grover, C., Bansal, S. & Martinez-Cruz, A. L. Influence of Social Network Effect and Incentive on Choice of Star Labeled Cars in India: a Latent Class Approach Based on Choice Experiment Discussion Paper 18–05 (Centre for International Trade and Development, 2018).

  124. Folkvord, F. et al. The effects of ecolabels on environmentally- and health-friendly cars: an online survey and two experimental studies. Int. J. Life Cycle Assess. 25, 883–899 (2020).

    Article  Google Scholar 

  125. Sussman, R., Kormos, C., Park, C. & Cooper, E. Energy Efficiency in Real Estate Listings: A Controlled Experiment (American Council for an Energy Efficient Economy, 2020); https://www.aceee.org/research-report/b2002

  126. Value for High-Performing Homes—Resources (Elevate, 2021); https://www.elevatenp.org/value-for-high-performing-homes-resources/

  127. Devine, A. & Kok, N. Green certification and building performance: implications for tangibles and intangibles. J. Portf. Manag. 41, 151–163 (2015).

    Article  Google Scholar 

  128. Asensio, O. I. & Delmas, M. A. The effectiveness of US energy efficiency building labels. Nat. Energy 2, 17033 (2017).

    Article  Google Scholar 

  129. Brookstein, P. & Caracino, J. Making the Value Visible: A Blueprint for Transforming the High-Performing Homes Market by Showcasing Clean and Efficient Energy Improvements (Elevate Energy & Building Performance Association, 2020); https://www.elevatenp.org/wp-content/uploads/Visible-Value-Blueprint-Final.pdf

Download references

Acknowledgements

K.S.N. was funded by the Carlsberg Foundation, grant no. CF20-0285. T.D.’s contributions were supported in part by Michigan AgBio Research. M.P.V.’s contributions were supported by the Climate Change Research Network and the Vanderbilt Dean’s Fund.

Author information

Author notes

  1. These authors contributed equally: Khan M. R. Taufique, Kristian S. Nielsen.

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Oxford Brookes Business School, Oxford Brookes University, Oxford, UK

    Khan M. R. Taufique

  2. Department of Marketing, Curtin University, Miri, Malaysia

    Khan M. R. Taufique

  3. Department of Psychology, University of Cambridge, Cambridge, UK

    Kristian S. Nielsen

  4. Department of Sociology, Michigan State University, East Lansing, MI, USA

    Thomas Dietz

  5. Environmental Science and Policy Program, Michigan State University, East Lansing, MI, USA

    Thomas Dietz

  6. Gund Institute for Environment, University of Vermont, Burlington, VT, USA

    Thomas Dietz

  7. Department of Human Ecology and Rutgers Energy Institute, Rutgers University, New Brunswick, NJ, USA

    Rachael Shwom

  8. Social and Environmental Research Institute, Shelburne Falls, MA, USA

    Paul C. Stern

  9. Vanderbilt Law School, Vanderbilt University, Nashville, TN, USA

    Michael P. Vandenbergh

Authors
  1. Khan M. R. Taufique
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. Kristian S. Nielsen
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  3. Thomas Dietz
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  4. Rachael Shwom
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  5. Paul C. Stern
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  6. Michael P. Vandenbergh
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Contributions

All the authors contributed significantly to conceptualizing the research and to writing the manuscript.

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Kristian S. Nielsen.

Ethics declarations

Competing interests

The authors declare no competing interests.

Peer review

Peer review information

Nature Climate Change thanks Katrina Kuh and the other, anonymous, reviewer(s) for their contribution to the peer review of this work.

Additional information

Publisher’s note Springer Nature remains neutral with regard to jurisdictional claims in published maps and institutional affiliations.

Supplementary information

Supplementary Information

Supplementary Tables 1–3.

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Check for updates. Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this article

Taufique, K.M.R., Nielsen, K.S., Dietz, T. et al. Revisiting the promise of carbon labelling. Nat. Clim. Chang. 12, 132–140 (2022). https://doi.org/10.1038/s41558-021-01271-8

Download citation

  • Received:

  • Accepted:

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1038/s41558-021-01271-8

This article is cited by

Search

Advanced search

Quick links

Nature Briefing

Sign up for the Nature Briefing newsletter — what matters in science, free to your inbox daily.

Get the most important science stories of the day, free in your inbox. Sign up for Nature Briefing