ASA Environmental Claims in Food advertising – Further Scrutiny expected from July 2024

On 18^th April 2024 the Advertising Standards Authority (ASA) published research ASA research into environmental claims in food advertising - ASA | CAP that involved the monitoring of a sample of thousands of ads through their Active Ad Monitoring system, which utilises AI to process online ads at scale, and human inspection.  Although the ASA concluded there was no widespread need for enforcement action to bring claims into compliance with the advertising rules they would none the less be providing for additional monitoring and follow-up engagement from July 2024. This was stated to be to address instances of clear-cut breaches of established positions already set down in existing ASA Rulings and Guidance, with the potential to formally investigate other, less clear-cut instances of non-compliant advertising within this sector, with a particular focus on unqualified sustainability and comparative environmental impact claims.  Guidance was also to be provided on the use of the term 'regenerative farming' and preparation towards a consultation on a food eco-labelling scheme. Please see: Environmental claims in food advertising - ASA | CAP

Key findings: 

• The ASA found the use of broad claims like ‘good for the planet’ were usually taken at face value and were less likely to be challenged by the research participants. However, when in the more reflective mindset of the interview, there was some concern expressed that such claims were so general and/or absolute, that they were unlikely to be verifiable – with some participants concerned that such claims could be a brand’s way of making stronger implicit claims without providing any evidence. 
• The use of certain terminology or visual imagery in advertising contexts could lead to a cascade of associations, imbuing a series of implied attributes into the product or brand that hadn’t been explicitly claimed. For example, using the word ‘natural’ could lead to the assumption that the products were also certified organic.  
• Visual imagery could also evoke assumptions about environmental, animal welfare, and health benefits. Images of produce which appeared ‘fresh’ could elicit beliefs in much the same way that terms such as ‘natural’ or ‘plant-based’ could. Green, both as a colour and a word, was reported to be powerfully evocative of environmental, animal welfare and plant-based themes, signalling a brand’s environmentally conscious ethos, without explicitly making any claims.  
• Research participants felt the use of specific terminology like ‘plant-based’ or ‘vegan’ was assumed to be accurate as it was viewed as clear and verifiable. In addition, the consequences of inaccuracy to vegetarian and vegan consumers could be high – and immediate. 
• Nutritional perception and healthy eating were frequently cited as the primary drivers of dietary preferences and food purchasing decisions, over the environmental impact of food, which was at most a secondary driver of purchase for the majority, and often used as post-rationalisation for choices rather than a catalyst. 
• Many participants felt that the claims (and counterclaims) made in ads comparing the environmental impact of plant-based products versus animal products effectively cancelled each other out; what’s more, there was a perception amongst some participants that some ads can feel overly ‘preachy’, with claims perceived to vilify a participant’s lifestyle choice (such as the choice to eat meat; these types of claims risked total disengagement from some participants).   

Key Recommendations

Key recommendations that the ASA will take forward in 2024: 

• The ASA will continue its engagement with the CMA, Defra, and industry stakeholders on its findings, and CAP will also be providing further guidance to industry this summer in the form of a series of Insight Articles to be published on the ASA website. (You can sign up to receive CAP’s Insight Articles here. )
• From July 2024 the ASA and CAP proposes additional monitoring and follow-up engagement to address instances of clear-cut breaches of established positions already set down in existing ASA Rulings and Guidance, with the potential to formally investigate other, less clear-cut instances of non-compliant advertising within this sector, with a particular focus on unqualified sustainability and comparative environmental impact claims. 
• Although this review found little evidence of obviously problematic examples of ‘green’ or ‘natural’ imagery in the sample analysed, the ASA will continue to monitor for potential misleading ‘green’ imagery issues in 2024, given the strong consumer research findings.  
• In order to better understand what regenerative farming involves (and any potential emerging issues around it), the ASA will engage with industry and other partners on the issue and thereafter produce guidance to assist businesses to make claims that are more likely to be compliant with the advertising rules. 
• Additionally, the ASA will continue to work in partnership with the Department for Environment, Food & Rural Affairs (DEFRA) and the Institute of Grocery Distribution (IGD) as they work with industry to gather information to inform their recommendations to the UK government that cover the label, methodology, data, and governance in preparation for consultation on a food eco-labelling scheme. 

It therefore looks like a summer of continued scrutiny on environmental claims for the food sector ahead of the CMA's additional involvement and the broad reach of the Digital Markets, Competition & Consumer Protection Bill expected to come into force this autumn.