This article was originally published on The Conversation, an independent and nonprofit source of news, analysis and commentary from academic experts. Disclosure information is available on the original site.
___
Author: Sadaf Mollaei, Arrell Research Chair in the Business of Food and Assistant Professor, Gordon S. Lang School of Business and Economics, University of Guelph
鈥淰egan,鈥� 鈥渧egetarian,鈥� 鈥渕eatless,鈥� 鈥減lant-based,鈥� 鈥減lant-rich,鈥� 鈥減lant-forward,鈥� 鈥渁nimal-free鈥�: these are all terms used to describe foods or diets that are mostly or completely made of non-animal sources.
This list can go on and, although these terms are to some extent related, they鈥檙e not the same. For example, the term 鈥渧egan,鈥� coined in 1944 by The Vegan Society, is used to define products that contain no animal-based ingredients.
According to Canada鈥檚 Food Guide, 鈥渧egetarian diets are those that exclude some or all animal products,鈥� whereas a plant-based diet is defined as one that 鈥減uts more emphasis on eating plant foods such as vegetables and fruits, whole-grains and legumes (beans) and less emphasis on eating animal foods.鈥�
In another definition, The British Dietetic Association describes a plant-based diet as 鈥渂ased on foods that come from plants with few or no ingredients that come from animals.鈥�
Why does this matter? Because regardless of the label, evidence supports that diets that contain fewer animal-based products such as meat are proven to be better for your health and the natural environment.
Adoption of plant-based diets remains low
Even with the growing public interest around plant-rich diets, the number of people adopting these diets remains low, particularly in Canada.
For many, plant-based foods are often perceived as an unfamiliar option that lacks in taste or does not align with their cultural food norms. Many consumers are also confused about the true meaning of these terms, which makes choosing food more complicated.
From a legislative perspective, many of these terms do not have unique legal definitions in in most markets, including Canada.
What is the result of all this confusion and perceived barriers? Even though there are a variety of plant-based food options available in stores, and various restaurants offering vegan/vegetarian dishes or full menus, plant-based foods are not many people鈥檚 choice.
A recent report by Globe Scan, an international insights and advisory firm, showed that 鈥渁lthough 68 per cent of people worldwide express interest in consuming more plant-based foods, only 20 per cent do so regularly, down from 23 per cent in 2023.鈥�
The report noted that with rising food costs, many consumers have returned to 鈥渃heaper, familiar foods鈥� rather than plant-based alternatives. Therefore, there is a growing need for more population-level support and interventions to help consumers navigate their food choices.
The responsibility and pressure to make the 鈥渞ight鈥� choice should not be solely on the consumer. They cannot be expected to make radical and sudden changes to their eating habits such as entirely eliminating meat. However, small modifications, such as gradually reducing animal-based food (instaed of complete elimiation) and moving towards plant-rich diets, is a promising solution.
So, what does this mean for food producers, restaurant owners and decision-makers who want to promote their products? They should use appealing language and framing to describe food, whether it鈥檚 the description on a menu or labels on a package. It鈥檚 important to avoid using labels that create more confusion or reinforce the feeling of unfamiliarity.
Here are four low-cost tips and recommendations that could help positively influence consumer choices:
1) Leverage the halo effect
The halo effect is a cognitive bias where one positive characteristic or impression of a product influences the overall perception. In terms of food labelling, this means people might be more likely to purchase food if the name is appealing to them.
Research shows labelling food vegan can decrease consumers鈥� taste expectations and, in turn, their purchasing intentions. On the contrary, labels and names that use appealing language that promotes delicious, high-quality food, evokes enjoyment and increases positive reactions is a strategy that has proven effective in altering consumer choices.
2) Emphasize the role of sensory appeal
A study by The Good Food Institute found that consumers responded more favourably to plant-based burgers described with indulgent terms compared to those labelled with health-focused or restrictive language.
Why? Because using descriptive language that highlights the taste, texture and overall eating experience attracts a broader audience. Terms such as savoury, juicy or spicy can enhance the appeal of plant-based dishes. Think about 鈥淛uicy American Burger鈥� versus a plant-based alternative that might be described simply as 鈥淰egan Burger.鈥�
3) Refrain from using terms with negative connotation
Steer clear of labels that may imply restriction, compromise or carry unintended negative connotations. Instead focus on terminology that implies inclusivity and offers complementary choices. The terms vegan and vegetarian are shown to be associated with negative stereotypes and feelings among some consumers, particularly the term vegan.
Labelling food as vegan/vegetarian does make food easily identifiable for consumers who are seeking plant-based options. However, using variants of 鈥減lant-based鈥� instead of vegan/vegetarian has been proven to increase mainstream consumer purchasing intent.
A further recommendation is to avoid labels such as plant-based milk 鈥渟ubstitute鈥� (for example for oat milk) or 鈥渧eggie burger,鈥� which can imply a replacement for existing choice and create an unnecessary competition between the choices.
4) Highlight provenance and culinary tradition
Plant-rich diets are not a new invention. Many food cultures around the globe have been plant-based for many years. Therefore, there is no need to reinvent the wheel to come up with labels and names. Take falafel, for example: it is essentially a veggie burger with a different name, yet it is popular among consumers.
Research also demonstrates highlighting food origins (also known as the country-of-origin effect) and including geographic references makes foods more appealing; for example, Panera Bread had a boost is soup sales by changing the name of one dish from 鈥淟ow Fat Vegetarian Black Bean Soup鈥� to 鈥淐uban Black Bean Soup.鈥�
Adopting a plant-rich diet is considered healthy and can be budget-friendly. Using language that appeals to consumers, instead of unfamiliar terms that may have negative associations for many people, can help encourage these dietary choices among a broader group of consumers.
___
Sadaf Mollaei does not work for, consult, own shares in or receive funding from any company or organisation that would benefit from this article, and has disclosed no relevant affiliations beyond their academic appointment.
___
This article is republished from The Conversation under a Creative Commons license. Disclosure information is available on the original site. Read the original article: https://theconversation.com/the-power-of-language-rethinking-food-labels-to-expand-our-plant-based-choices-249698
Sadaf Mollaei, Arrell Research Chair in the Business of Food and Assistant Professor, Gordon S. Lang School of Business and Economics, University of Guelph, The Conversation
