Sustainability Levies: Which Are Preferred?

Steering levies can change consumer behaviour. An Agroscope study focusing on a sustainability levy on food showed that social sustainability and animal welfare levies are most likely to meet with acceptance.

Previous studies have investigated policy measures in general and sustainability labels in particular. Agroscope researchers have now tested the acceptance of sustainability levies, which are a specific type of tax. If the monies collected are used for specific purposes such as e.g. improving animal welfare, this can increase acceptance.

First levies exist, studies on them are lacking

Various sustainability levies already exist – for example, consumers can buy so-called ‘fair Swiss milk’ at a higher price. The price increase ensures that producers receive a break-even milk price. By the same token, in some supermarkets customers can offset their CO₂ footprint or donate money to climate funds. Because, there are currently very few scientific studies on consumer acceptance or preference, however, Agroscope researchers have investigated precisely this topic.

The most popular sustainability levy

A total of 525 people, 50% of them women, were interviewed in an online survey conducted in German-speaking Switzerland. As part on an online experiment, the participants were presented with the following scenario:

“Imagine that in the supermarket where you shop most often, part of the retail price of a particular product is earmarked for sustainability projects. Afterwards you see a product category and four possible versions of the product, all of which cost the same. Please choose the product which you would be most likely to purchase.”

The participants were then to decide on one of the four sustainability levies for each of the six products (fresh/processed vegetables, fresh/processed dairy products and fresh/processed meat products) (see Figure 1):

For meat and dairy products, participants most frequently chose sustainability levy A for animal welfare, followed by option B for social sustainability (Figure 2). Moreover, social sustainability seemed to play a more important role for vegetables than for animal products. The willingness to earmark part (approx. 22%) of the product price for the support of local farmers – i.e. for the sake of social sustainability – was lower for meat products than for vegetables (approx. 32%) and dairy products (approx. 29%).

Participants opted for the general sustainability levy (option D) more frequently in the case of the processed product than they did in the case of the fresh product. By the same token, more participants chose the ecological sustainability levy (option C) for the processed product than for the fresh product.