Researchers have found that supermarket foods marketed as "natural" or "sustainable" often primarily use these terms for marketing purposes.

Australian researchers have found that foods in supermarkets using environmental terms like "natural" or "sustainable" are often using marketing language rather than verified claims. Researchers from the George Institute for Global Health assessed over 27,000 packaged foods sold at Coles, Woolworths, Aldi, IGA, and Harris Farm supermarkets in Sydney. The study, published in Public Health Nutrition, found that nearly four in ten products carried some form of sustainability claim. Associate Professor Alexandra Jones, the institute's program lead for food governance, stated that most claims were self-declared by manufacturers without independent verification. "Consumers are increasingly trying to make food choices that are good for the planet, and manufacturers know it. What we're finding is that the labels designed to guide those choices are largely unregulated, and that creates real risks of greenwashing." Of the 69 different environmental claims identified, "natural" and "vegan" were the most common. Some terms, like "sustainable" or "natural," were so broad as to be almost meaningless, she said. "There's no legal meaning of 'natural,' but we know that people associate it with being better for you, or being better for the environment. But many things are natural that are not good in a health context. Sugar is natural – that doesn't mean it's good for you." In a second study, George Institute researchers investigated whether products with climate-related claims actually had lower emissions, publishing their results in Cleaner and Responsible Consumption. They generally found that products making such claims had lower carbon footprints, but in certain categories, the opposite was true. In meat and confectionery – two high-emission categories – products boasting environmental benefits had significantly higher emissions than their unlabeled counterparts. Lead author Mariel Keaney said this raised serious concerns about consumer trust. "When 'carbon friendly' labels appear on some of the highest-emitting products in a category, that label isn't just unhelpful; it's also potentially misleading. Shoppers trying to reduce their environmental footprint deserve better than that." Professor Natalina Zlatevska, who researches health and sustainability marketing policy at the University of Technology Sydney, said consumers are interested in sustainability and want to understand the environmental impact of their food and grocery items. However, Zlatevska, who was not involved in the research, noted that the variety of claims and the lack of clear definitions create confusion. "What's lacking is something that's universal." She pointed to standardized rating systems like the Eco-Score in France, which uses a traffic light system to reflect a product's environmental impact. "It needs to be informative enough for a consumer to make a really fast decision in the supermarket. Anything that's color-coded and easy to decipher." Chandni Gupta, deputy chief executive of the Consumer Policy Research Centre, who was also not involved in the research, said that about half of Australians consider sustainability when shopping and often rely on labels or on-pack messaging. Clear, specific labels backed by evidence or independent verification can be helpful. "We found that Australians want practical information that helps them compare products and make informed choices. The problem is that genuinely useful claims currently sit alongside vague or unsubstantiated ones, making it harder for anyone to know what to trust." Jones said the findings highlight the need for regulatory action. If environmental claims were robust and regulated, they could be a powerful tool to improve the sustainability of foods. In the meantime, consumers who want to reduce their impact should focus on reducing their meat intake and eating more fruits, vegetables, and legumes – "whole categories that we know are better for the environment, rather than worrying too much about individual products."