Legumes are valued in agricultural systems, as they can contribute to a more sustainable land use. However, their economic value is low. Despite health and environmental benefits, marketers struggle to communicate the worth of legumes to consumers. We evaluate the worth of health and, in particular, environmental claims that would spread consumers’ awareness of ecological advantages. Utilizing a large consumer sample, we execute binding online auctions. Comparing claim-treated and untreated subjects (between design), we model the price premium that potential customers are willing to pay (WTP) for having pasta in a legume instead of a wheat version. We find that claims may increase the WTP, however, a mix of environmental and health claims is superior to individual claims. Effect sizes suggest that the mix of claims increases the WTP by roughly 35% (20 cents). The link of WTP and food attitudes, such as concern for health in eating habits or social reservations towards legumes, varies depending on whether the green-pea or chickpea pasta was evaluated. A critical perception of legumes’ association with flatulence reduces the WTP. Developing the online auction may enable researchers to increase the external validity of consumer samples. We discuss implications for researchers and marketers.

Summary: Today, the food sector is largely excluded from climate protection policies. Nevertheless, the food sector is responsible for about 20 per cent of greenhouse gases. Food policies could substantially contribute to the EU’s ambitious climate goals. Currently, the debate on CO₂‐e labelling is gaining momentum. Consumers know very little about the climate footprint associated with food choices. A climate label would strengthen consumer knowledge, may eventually influence food choices, could trigger reformulation efforts, raises awareness, and contribute to better informed discussions about climate policy. Based on a review of the current state of research and industry developments on designing CO₂ footprint labels, this article provides recommendations on how to develop a clearly understood and trustworthy label. We propose a government approved, multi‐level, and categorical CO₂‐e label, with colour coding and numeric CO₂ equivalents; primarily based initially on median values. The design of the label should allow for an adoption of other environmental dimensions in the future. It should be scaled to weight (CO₂‐e per kg) and apply to food products and meals. In the proposed form, a CO₂‐e label is a low‐cost instrument. As more and more companies are already starting to label their products in different ways, consumer confusion is likely to rise if no uniform guidelines are established.

On the one hand, default nudges are proven to strongly influence behavior. On the other hand, a number of consumer autonomy and welfare concerns have been raised that hinder public policy applications. Both nudge success and ethical concerns depend heavily on the design of defaults. We identify six taxonomic characteristics that matter to the ethical and the nudge success dimension. We review the default nudge literature (N = 61) and review ethical studies to assess both dimensions concerning the taxonomy. When designing a default, a choice architect inevitably makes a decision concerning the characteristics. Among others, the results show three main findings. (1) The initial choice architecture regularly imposes welfare losses and impedes consumer autonomy. Forced active choosing can mitigate both issues. (2) Empirical evidence suggests that transparent defaults are similarly effective as the non-transparent counterparts. (3) The framing of the choice in combination with a choice structuring default leads to greater nudge success and tends to involve the reflective decision-making patterns. Choice architects can trade-off nudge success for legitimacy but a design change may also benefit one without harming the other. We discuss further options of choice architects to legitimize a default.

Staatliche Eingriffe in den Lebensmittelkonsum der Deutschen sind im europäischen Vergleich eher selten. Politiker(innen) empfinden wohl Lenkungssteuern- oder Werbeverbote als unpopulär. Konkrete Maßnahmen zum Klimaschutz, etwa eine Klimasteuer auf importierte Flugwaren, stoßen jedoch auf breite Zustimmung und könnten durchaus zu Klimazielen beitragen.In view of climate change, policy approaches addressing the consumption side of nutrition are becoming increasingly relevant to lowering greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions. Yet, adequate policy instruments can be risky. They interfere with individual freedom of choice and can thus be unpopular. This study investigates the social acceptance of governmental interventions. The study explores four types of climate policy instruments of increasing depth of intervention: 1. information and education, 2. nudging, 3. taxation, 4. bans. Information and nudging are met with the largest degree of approval. Assuming that acceptance will decrease with the depth of intervention, the equally critical perception of taxation and bans is an exception. Apart from the depth of intervention, social acceptance also depends on the field of action. For instance, taxation of airfreight products would be widely accepted. The conclusion explores nutrition policy options motivated by climate policy considerations.