Evaluating and Navigating the Sustainable Food Business Landscape

Many consumers seek to align their food purchasing decisions with their values. Yet, those hoping to buy products that “do good” are hard pressed to navigate the terms used to explain social missions and identify the businesses that claim to be producing both a consumable good and a social benefit. The myriad of labels and certifications includes sustainable, mission-based, better-for-you, B Corps, local, USDA Organic, Non-GMO, Demeter Certified Biodynamic, Rainforest Alliance, and so on. Layer the subconscious influence of ads with the ever-changing landscape of nutritional information, and it’s nearly impossible to determine which products align with our social, environmental, and personal health priorities.

By providing consumers with an accessible source of information, sustainable consumer shopping and habit building guides can help create transparency in the food industry. For some product categories, such as household cleaning products, excellent guides already exist. However, it is rare to see sustainable product shopping guides for food products. Existing dietitian developed guides provide helpful nutritional information, but do not take into account sustainable packaging, farming practice and ingredient sourcing.

My masters capstone project outlines the components of a guide to be titled “Best Practices in Sustainable Food Shopping.” This guide will aid consumers in navigating mission-based and better-for-you food product categories. My work also assesses why it is challenging to create such a guide. As my broader research and thesis proves, the majority of these challenges result from the complex relationships between farmers, distributors, big food companies, and retailers within the industrial, global food system.

Key elements of Best Practices in Sustainable Food Shopping

Based on an analysis of existing guides, social entrepreneurship, and marketing, a consumer focused “Best Practices in Sustainable Food Shopping” guide to navigate responsible food companies should address, at a minimum, the following five components in order to empower consumers to vote with their dollars and create change to build more transparent and sustainable supply chains in the food industry.

Policy Work or Give Back Initiative

Does the company engage in policy related work such as banning specific ingredients from its product? Does the company engage in give-back initiatives such as donating excess food? Overall, is there an element of the food company’s mission or work that addresses and takes action in an attempt to change a supply chain issue in the food system?

Is the Company True to It’s Mission?

A key question for the mission driven consumer is whether a company’s behavior matches the company’s mission in general. How is the company proving commitment to it’s mission to you as a consumer? What metrics are being used to display net positive impact?

Ingredients to Avoid List

A set of food product ingredients to avoid in packaged food products include added sugar, high fructose corn syrup, and refined grains. When consumed in excess, these ingredients can lead to obesity and diet related illness such as Type II Diabetes or cardiovascular disease.

 

Ingredient Sourcing: Transportation + Farming Practice  

Criteria to understand where ingredients are sourced from including location of ingredient source, distance travelled to production process, and farming practice type (i.e. organic, biodynamic, etc.). Minimizing food miles travelled from farm to end consumer results in more nutrient dense, higher quality food while reducing environmental impacts of transit. Harmful chemical sprays deplete nutrients in soil; therefore, farming practice directly correlates to a company or farm’s commitment to soil health and regeneration.

Labeling

A glossary to aid consumers in navigating the complex world of food labelling in the United States. This section will include an overview of USDA Organics regulations and FDA approved and regulated label usage. It will also feature vague words over utilized by food companies, such as all-natural, which is not regulated and does not have a streamlined definition across the industry; and best practices to evaluate suggested health claims on products such as “may reduce cholesterol.”

Barriers to developing Best Practices in Sustainable Food Shopping

Each of the five key components above contain a critical aspect to consumer identification of sustainable food products. Yet, the immense complexity of each element makes it challenging to create a single set of guidelines to be applied to all food products within the mission-based and better-for-you categories. Six critical challenges to providing a simple framework for consumer decision-making follow.

Lack of Standardized Definition of Sustainability

Many companies fail to define which elements of their business are sustainable, such as production and waste processes, packaging, farming practice, or other. The absence of a streamlined definition of sustainability impedes the process of creating transparency from the farm to the consumer.

 Lack of Audit Based System to Evaluate or Create Standards

The only existing third party certification of mission-based companies is the B Corporation Certification. This assessment evaluates how a company’s operations and business model impact its workers, community, environment and consumers, along with supply chain processes, transparency and accountability requirements. While B Corp certification implies a company’s commitment to do good in the world, the approval process is generalized across many industries and, as a consumer, it is very challenging to find specific information on those necessary requirements for food products to achieve certification.

 Varying Consumer Demographics

The variation in customer demographics create another challenge. The key areas where these demographics vary is across commitment to a sustainability mindset and household income. For example, an affluent Whole Foods shopper may be most concerned with 100% grass-fed beef and be willing to pay a premium for this product. Where as a consumer who has the intention to shop sustainably, but cannot afford the 100% grass-fed beef, may opt for a small farm product that is grass finished and less expensive as this decision is still better off than industrial beef farm products injected with hormones and antibiotics.

 Lack of Labeling Regulation + Certification Fatigue

The FDA and USDA do not regulate all language used in the marketing of food products or on food product labels. Food companies have a certain amount of liberty in how they market their products. The food product labeling conversation is complex and consequentially always under review. And, as more certifications appear on food products, consumers experience labeling fatigue, leading to exhaustion and confusion on which new certification they should be prioritizing. Additionally, consumers face the health halo effect resulting in consumers seeing a certification and automatically assuming a product is “healthy” because bears the certification label  as “Gluten Free” or “USDA Organic.”

Sourcing and Production Process by Ingredient or Food Type

Due to the nuances of products such as apples versus lettuce versus eggs versus chicken versus beef, it is challenging to pinpoint one farming method or production process as the best-rated option across all fresh food product categories. Additionally, geographic location plays a large role in soil quality, climate and the ability to grow all produce without certain inputs. While relying on USDA Organic Certified products is one way to vet ingredients, there is concern regarding the dilution and credibility of USDA Certification due to Big Food Corporations and farmers at all scales finding loopholes in certification for production efficiency.

 Lack of Benchmark Metrics for Environmental Degradation Reduction & “Do Good” Claims

Companies rely on many metrics and methodologies to prove their reduced environmental impact. The variation across metrics, makes it impossible to make side-by-side company comparisons even within the same industry. The lack of benchmark metrics for company “do good” evaluation makes it much more challenging for consumers to find the information they need to understand if their values align with said company.

Conclusion

The complex nature of food supply chains and product transparency makes it challenging to create a general set of shopping principles to be applicable across all categories of food. Empowering consumers to make purchasing decisions that align with their values and priorities in food has the potential to spur grassroots movements in regional communities such as sustainability focused ecosystems – a network of sustainability minded farmers, retailers, and food producers – which, ideally, will ladder up to tangible change in more transparent food supply chains. This research reiterates that it is challenging to be truly, 100% sustainable, but being armed with the tools to make the decision that will reduce harm is better than doing nothing at all.

For further information and resources, visit the extended thesis to this summary; the “Vote with Your Dollar: Shopping Tips to a More Sustainable Food System” infographic; the Appendix I: Criteria; and the additional resources section of the broader thesis which includes organizations and companies that are already hosting initiatives focused on this work.