Toward a sustainable research agenda on food eco-labelling in the business and management research domain

Geldres-Weiss, Valeska V.; Nicolas, Carolina; Massa, Nathaniel P. Article Toward a sustainable research agenda on food ecolabelling in the business and management research domain European Journal of Management and Business Economics (EJM&BE) Provided in Cooperation with: European Academy of Management and Business Economics (AEDEM), Vigo (Pontevedra) Suggested Citation: Geldres-Weiss, Valeska V.; Nicolas, Carolina; Massa, Nathaniel P. (2024) : Toward a sustainable research agenda on food eco-labelling in the business and management research domain, European Journal of Management and Business Economics (EJM&BE), ISSN 2444-8451, Emerald, Leeds, Vol. 33, Iss. 4, pp. 429-444, https://doi.org/10.1108/EJMBE-08-2023-0246 This Version is available at: https://hdl.handle.net/10419/325578 Standard-Nutzungsbedingungen: Die Dokumente auf EconStor dürfen zu eigenen wissenschaftlichen Zwecken und zum Privatgebrauch gespeichert und kopiert werden. Sie dürfen die Dokumente nicht für öffentliche oder kommerzielle Zwecke vervielfältigen, öffentlich ausstellen, öffentlich zugänglich machen, vertreiben oder anderweitig nutzen. Sofern die Verfasser die Dokumente unter Open-Content-Lizenzen (insbesondere CC-Lizenzen) zur Verfügung gestellt haben sollten, gelten abweichend von diesen Nutzungsbedingungen die in der dort genannten Lizenz gewährten Nutzungsrechte. Terms of use: Documents in EconStor may be saved and copied for your personal and scholarly purposes. You are not to copy documents for public or commercial purposes, to exhibit the documents publicly, to make them publicly available on the internet, or to distribute or otherwise use the documents in public. If the documents have been made available under an Open Content Licence (especially Creative Commons Licences), you may exercise further usage rights as specified in the indicated licence. https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/ Toward a sustainable research agenda on food eco-labelling in the business and management research domain Valeska V. Geldres-Weiss Departamento de Administraci on y Econom ıa, Facultad de Ciencias Jur ıdicas y Empresariales, Universidad de La Frontera, Temuco, Chile Carolina Nicolas Departamento de Administraci on, Facultad de Administraci on y Econom ıa, Universidad de Santiago de Chile (USACH), Santiago, Chile, and Nathaniel P. Massa Department of Business and Enterprise Management, Faculty of Economics, Management and Accountancy, University of Malta, Msida, Malta Abstract Purpose –This study aims to critically review the research on food eco-labels to identify research gaps and recommend future research directions in business and management. Design/methodology/approach –A hybrid integrated review combines bibliometric analysis with an in-depth framework-based study of theory–context–characteristics–methodology (TCCM) and reviews quality research published over 21 years between 2002 and 2022. Findings –We identify key research themes and the knowledge structure of food eco-label research. Future researchers should explore food eco-label dynamics and phenomena in areas related to consumer behaviour, information, consumer knowledge, environmental concerns, trust, packaging and willingness-to-pay as antecedent factors. Research limitations/implications –This review contributes to the business and management literature by quantifying existing research and consolidating its evolution. The articles were sourced from the established Web of Science (WoS) database. Other databases should be included in future reviews. We also focus on research published in business and management. Further studies could include research beyond such specialised domains. Practical implications –Consumers need more information on the objectives and meaning of food ecolabels. The dissemination of knowledge on eco-labels, as well as effective communication and information on eco-labels, are relevant to future research issues. Social implications –The knowledge derived from this research holds significant potential in shaping policies and devising tools aimed at reducing the carbon footprint linked to food production and consumption. Food eco-labelling research agenda 429 © Valeska V. Geldres-Weiss, Carolina Nicolas and Nathaniel P. Massa. Published in European Journal of Management and Business Economics. Published by Emerald Publishing Limited. This article is published under the Creative Commons Attribution (CC BY 4.0) licence. Anyone may reproduce, distribute, translate and create derivative works of this article (for both commercial and non-commercial purposes), subject to full attribution to the original publication and authors. The full terms of this licence may be seen at http://creativecommons.org/licences/by/4.0/legalcode This paper forms part of a special section “Innovation, Knowledge, and Digitalization: Building Trust to Face Today’s Challenges”, guest edited by Alba Yela Ar anega and Juan Miguel Alc antara-Pilar. Funding: This research was funded by the Chilean National Research Agency and Development ANID, grant to Promote International Linkage for Regional Research Institutions, grant number FOVI210039. Declaration of conflicting interest: The authors declare that they have no conflict of interest. The current issue and full text archive of this journal is available on Emerald Insight at: https://www.emerald.com/insight/2444-8494.htm Received 3 August 2023 Revised 4 October 2023 31 October 2023 24 December 2023 28 December 2023 Accepted 8 January 2024 European Journal of Management and Business Economics Vol. 33 No. 4, 2024 pp. 429-444 Emerald Publishing Limited e-ISSN: 2444-8494 p-ISSN: 2444-8451 DOI 10.1108/EJMBE-08-2023-0246 Considering the substantial impact of these activities on our planet’s carbon footprint, addressing food security and sustainability emerges as a crucial concern for humanity. Recognising the importance of eco-label communication and information becomes particularly pertinent for future generations, who stand to bear the most substantial impact of climate change and sustainable development. These generations are also more inclined toward embracing and implementing sustainable practices. Originality/value –There are no comprehensive, integrated reviews exploring the methods, variables and constructs used in studies on food eco-labels based on all articles published in WoS journals in the business and management domains. This is the first comprehensive literature review using a hybrid approach (bibliometric review with TCCM framework) in the field of food eco-label research. Keywords Eco-label, Food, Sustainability, TCCM, Bibliometric analysis, Marketing Paper type Research paper 1. Introduction Environmental sustainability poses a critical challenge for humanity. Growing environmental initiatives align with public concern and consumer activism, pressuring politicians and businesses to prioritise responsible production and consumption. Food consumption, accounting for a third of households’environmental impact, plays a crucial role. Its production generates a similar share of human-caused greenhouse gases. Calls for agricultural sustainability and the significance of sustainable supplier selection for company performance are emphasised by various authors (Crippa et al., 2021;Aliabadi et al., 2022). Eco-labels inform buyers about sustainability, impacting their choices. Few studies on food eco-labels exist. Manta et al. (2023) suggest exploring eco-label roles in local development. D orea et al. (2022) emphasise consumer influence on environmental labels. Maesano et al. (2019) advocate examining social and economic sustainability. Notably, these studies cover diverse sectors but not specifically agri-food products. The only study to focus on a research area is Maesano et al. (2019), who focused on social sciences. To fill these research gaps, this study focuses on food eco-labels in the business and management research domains. We analyse food product eco-label research from business and management journals using the Web of Science (WoS) database. We scrutinise studies between 2002 and 2022 with keywords like “ecolabel*”,“eco-label*”,“sustainab* label*”,“eco-friendly label*”, “environmental label”and “food”in titles, abstracts or keywords. Results are refined based on business and management subject area, journal source and English language. We performed a bibliometric analysis, reviewing 32 research papers using the theory– context–characteristics–methodology (TCCM) approach (Paul and Rosado-Serrano, 2019). This approach differs from previous studies by providing comprehensive insights beyond typical bibliometric descriptions. Our analysis delves into thematic and co-occurrence keywords, addressing future research challenges, in contrast to prior studies focussing on variables like authors, countries and keywords (Chen et al., 2023;Lim et al., 2021;Mandler et al., 2021;Paul et al., 2021). D orea et al. (2022) and Manta et al. (2023) explored environmental/sustainable labelling but not within the food sector or a specific research domain. In contrast, Maesano et al. (2019) exclusively studied the wine sector. This gap prompts overarching questions to be addressed. RQ1. What is the structure of research on food eco-labels in the business and management research domains? RQ2. What are the research gaps in the existing literature, and what are avenues for future research in the field of food eco-labels in these domains? The paper’s structure is as follows: Section 2 reviews relevant literature on eco-labels in food contexts. Section 3 details our hybrid review method and the bibliometric/TCCM approaches used. Section 4 reveals the findings. Section 5 consolidates our discussion, summarising state- EJMBE 33,4 430 of-the-art methods. Furthermore, it outlines future research paths, potential limitations and concludes by emphasising managerial and social implications. 2. Literature review Participation in eco-labelling schemes, as noted by Gulbrandsen (2006), allows companies to address diverse stakeholders –environmental groups, governments, retailers and ecoconscious consumers. Eco-labels communicate qualities not evident during consumption (Rao et al.,1999) and visually highlight a product’s green attributes in business terms (Thøgersen et al.,2010). The role of eco-labels varies based on stakeholders’perspectives (Bratt et al., 2011), serving as a benchmark for improvement and competitiveness from a producer’s viewpoint. Consumer-focused eco-labels serve as information channels and tools for spreading awareness within the market. They communicate positive environmental and social impacts while reducing uncertainty in consumers’environmentally conscious purchases (Donato and Adıg€ uzel, 2022). Lee et al. (2020) highlighted that sustainable labels aim to prioritise environmentally friendly products, categorising their impact into three key areas: reducing environmental impact, influencing consumer awareness and attitudes, and changing consumption behaviour. Despite various studies on ecolabel adoption and outcomes, comprehensive reviews in the food sector, particularly within business and management journals, are limited. Existing research primarily originates from journals focused on food policy, sustainability, environmental studies and government policy papers (Grunert et al., 2014;Leach et al., 2016;Riskos et al., 2021;Stein and de Lima, 2022;Narciso and Fonte, 2021). Additionally, reviews by Asioli et al. (2020),Potter et al. (2021) and Prieto-Sandoval et al. (2016) encompass literature from diverse fields such as agricultural economics, environmental studies, psychology and environmental engineering. Grunert et al. (2014) found sustainability labels don’t significantly impact food choices. Leach et al. (2016) highlighted the need to understand consumer use of environmental impact labels, suggesting varying suitability across sectors. Prieto-Sandoval et al. (2016) noted a gap in understanding eco-labels’influence on technological development. Asioli et al. (2020) stressed the importance of understanding consumer values and enhancing eco-label comprehension. Narciso and Fonte (2021) advocated policy reforms for inclusive decisionmaking in promoting healthy diets. Potter et al. (2021) supported eco-labels’role but called for more research on their attributes. Riskos et al. (2021) emphasised the credibility of eco-labels in influencing green purchase behaviour. Lastly, Stein and de Lima (2022) endorsed comprehensive mandatory labelling for sustainability, encompassing multiple dimensions and evidence-based criteria. Eco-labelling predominantly influences markets, but wider environmental goals rely on economic actors transitioning to sustainable business models. Managers and organisations drive eco-label decisions and sustainability initiatives. D orea et al. (2022) highlighted marketdriven articles on eco-labelling dimensions. Hence, focussing on business and management journals in our review seems crucial to shaping research agendas in this domain. Three literature reviews on eco-labels in business and management journals –D orea et al. (2022),Manta et al. (2023) and Maesano et al. (2019) –were identified in the WoS database. D orea et al. (2022) conducted a broad analysis of environmental labelling across various products. Manta et al. (2023) examined eco-labelling certification approaches across different sectors, including tourism. Maesano et al. (2019) focused solely on wine-related purchasing behaviour within the specified timeframe of 2003–2018. D orea et al. (2022) highlighted the prevalence of eco-label studies within the food industry, especially regarding fish, rice and coffee, emphasising the sector’s significance in ecolabelling due to its engagement with consumers, suppliers and the government. They noted a growing interest in sustainability after 2010, particularly in food, agriculture and seafood. Food eco-labelling research agenda 431 Maesano et al. (2019) noted a research focus on the environmental aspect of sustainability and identified gaps in understanding contextual impacts on consumer behaviour and persistent confusion surrounding sustainability concepts. Manta et al. (2023) emphasised territorial development and stakeholders’perceptions of labelling, highlighting the need to understand factors influencing label design and development. 3. Research methodology This study utilises a hybrid review approach combining bibliometric analysis and a framework-based review, as proposed by Paul and Rosado-Serrano (2019) and Nicolas and Geldres-Weiss (2023). Employing the TCCM approach (Paul and Rosado-Serrano, 2019), this systematic analysis explores food eco-label literature in business and management domains. Aligned with Paul and Rosado-Serrano (2019), our goal was to enhance comprehension of sustainability labels in the food and beverage sectors within business and management studies. Identifying key gaps in existing literature, we aimed to guide future research directions. Although other databases like Scopus and Google Scholar exist, our study focused on WoS due to its renowned journal quality and analytical systems. WoS is recognised as a reliable global citation database for publishers (Valenzuela et al., 2018) and is widely trusted in academic and scientific research worldwide (Clarivate, 2023). 3.1 Data collection and processing The WoS database was used to identify all its published studies on food eco-label research between 2002 and 2022. The search query was built as a keyword search: ecolabel* AND food AND business, OR ecolabel* AND food AND management, OR eco-label* AND food AND business, OR eco-label* AND food AND management, OR “sustainab* label*”AND food AND business, OR “sustainab* label*”AND food AND management, OR “Eco-friendly label*”AND food AND business, OR “Eco-friendly label*”AND food AND management, OR “environmental label”AND food AND business; OR “environmental label”AND food AND management. Subsequently, the only documents of interest were articles, review articles, letters and notes (Merig oet al.,2015). Then, the final search criteria were filtered and redefined by selecting the criteria subject area set to “business”and “management”,typeofsourceset to “journal”, and language “English”–in order to retrieve all relevant significant studies from all the available journals in the area of business and management research. A total of 79 documents were identified (Figure A1).Thesearchwasperformedon7 December 2022. To ensure study relevance and quality, specific inclusion and exclusion criteria were set. Following protocols from prior systematic reviews in management (Mart ınez-L opez et al., 2018), our search focused on peer-reviewed academic publications in the WoS scientific database, known for its top-tier business and management journals. Papers not aligning with business and management analysis were excluded, resulting in the removal of 25 papers. Additionally, 19 duplicates from the keyword search and three bibliometric reviews were also excluded. Refer to Figure A1 for the article selection process. Out of the initially identified 60 papers, 25 were discarded after review for misalignment with our research focus. These excluded papers covered diverse topics such as eco-labelling organisations, organic markets, non-food products, carbon calculators, sustainable funds, seed licences and studies lacking label analysis, resulting in 35 papers remaining. Among these, three were literature reviews, leaving 32 papers for bibliometric analysis (see Figure A1). It’s important to note that the exclusion of studies unrelated to food may limit the breadth of insights in eco-labelling beyond the food sector. EJMBE 33,4 432 3.2 Study design 3.2.1 Bibliometric analysis. Following the research questions outlined in the Introduction, the study’s structure was guided accordingly. To address RQ1, a bibliometric analysis was conducted, drawing from methodologies outlined by Valenzuela-Fernandez et al. (2019). This analysis, performed using VOSviewer software, aimed to uncover trends, citation patterns and influential aspects within the research field through keyword co-occurrence analysis. A ranking was established based on several indicators, with the H-index as the primary criterion. The H-index, known for its simplicity and balance between publication volume and influence, signifies that a minimum of “x”articles have received at least “x”citations. This metric combines publication output and citation impact, focussing on primary citations and offering equal weight to both publications and citations (Valenzuela-Fernandez et al., 2019). The bibliographic review covered the following aspects: (1) Annual scientific production: Reveals research trends and interest in the topic. (2) Most-cited journal: Identifies influential journals based on total papers, citations, average citations per paper and H-index. (3) Country citations: Identifies research productivity by country, considering total papers and citations. (4) Most-cited papers: Ranks the top ten influential papers, detailing their citations, authors and average citations per year. (5) Keyword co-occurrence analysis: Examines related topics within the study by analysing cited articles and establishing the topic’s structure. 3.2.2 Theory–context–characteristics–methodology (TCCM). Addressing RQ2, we employed the TCCM analysis, previously used effectively in business research by Paul et al. (2021), Chen et al. (2021),Lim et al. (2021) and Mandler et al. (2021). This framework facilitated a comprehensive exploration of prevalent theories, constructs, methods and potential research directions within food eco-label studies, aiding in theory development, contextual understanding and methodological exploration for future research. 4. Results 4.1 Findings of bibliometric analysis There’s a notable upward trend in scientific interest and a significant surge in research on this topic, particularly evident from 2021. The publication of articles on this subject has seen a recent increase, averaging three articles per year over the past eight years (refer to Figure A2). Based on the Journal Citation Report (JCR), the top five influential journals in the “Business” category of the social science citation index (SSCI) relate to our topic (refer to Table A.I). Each journal listed had a minimum of two publications for ranking, as per the WoS database. Among journals publishing two or more articles on food eco-labelling, the top-ranking journals based on total publications are as follows: International Journal of Consumer Studies: 4 articles, 202 citations, Q2, JCR Category: Business in SSCI; Business Strategy and the Environment: 3 articles, 102 citations, Q1, JCR Category: Business in SSCI; Journal of Business Research: 3 articles, 60 citations, Q1, JCR Category: Business in SSCI and Journal of Retailing and Consumer Services: 3 articles, 12 citations, Q1, JCR Category: Business in SSCI (refer to Table A.I). Regarding the total publications by country (see Table A.II) we consider the level of scientific effort in the respective countries or regions in relation to scientific publications and citations (Clarivate Analytics). These indicators tend to be closely associated with the gross domestic product (GDP) and other economic output measures. Clarivate Analytics accounts Food eco-labelling research agenda 433 for countries/regions based on the institutional associations represented in published articles, considering the affiliations of all authors. We considered countries with a minimum of two WoS publications for analysis. The US, Denmark and the Netherlands emerged as the most influential based on citations, while the US, UK and Italy were frequently mentioned in published papers. Notably, Central America, South America and Africa lacked publications on this topic. From 2002 to 2022, 11 countries were mentioned in at least two papers, with the US leading with 13 papers and 682 citations. Strong interest in this research is evident in Nordic countries like Denmark, the Netherlands and, to a lesser extent, Norway. Europe and the EU show substantial involvement in this field (refer to Table A.III). The most frequently cited paper, with 218 citations, is titled “Willingness to pay for organic products: Differences between virtue and vice foods,”published in the International Journal of Research in Marketing in 2021. Table AII displays the top ten most-cited articles. We aimed to identify primary keywords used by authors in the reviewed papers. Figure A3 and Table AIII present the visual and analytical results of keyword co-occurrences. Keyword co-occurrence clustering was generated using VOSviewer software (Figure A3). Nodes’sizes represent keyword frequency, while connecting lines indicate shared keywords. Thicker lines denote stronger co-occurrence relationships between keywords (see Table A.IV and Figure A3). 4.2 Findings of TCCM analysis Theory development. Recent studies have incorporated several key theories: cue utilisation theory (Orlowski et al., 2022), aiding understanding of consumer expectations for non-visible product attributes (Olson and Jacoby, 1972); the theory of planned behaviour (TPB) (Chen, 2020;Siraj et al., 2022), comprising attitude, subjective norms and perceived behavioural control (Ajzen, 1991); and signalling theory (De Brabandere et al., 2022;Sigurdsson et al., 2022), addressing information asymmetry reduction in market exchanges (Karasek and Bryant, 2012) (refer to Table A.V). Context. Although research predominantly targets food in general, specific studies have delved into distinct food items like chocolate chip cookies (Amos et al., 2019), cereal bars (Ertz et al., 2017), muesli cereals (De Brabandere et al., 2022), yoghurt (Donato and Adıg€ uzel, 2022) and various commodities including coffee, rice, milk, fruit, meat, seafood and wine. Some studies have explored multiple food products. Regarding the eco-labels featured or evaluated, most studies discuss eco-labels in generic terms such as “sustainable label”,“eco-label”,“eco-friendly label”,“green label”or “environmental label”. However, two prominent eco-labels often studied are the “organic label”and “carbon label.”Geographic research primarily focuses on developed regions like the European Union, North America and Oceania. We examined various antecedents, moderators and dependent variables in food eco-label research. Antecedents encompass consumer-related factors like attitudes toward sustainability labels, environmental and health concerns, preferences for eco-label products and knowledge about eco-labels (refer to Table A.VI). Labels and packaging were also significant factors influencing eco-label effectiveness, alongside information. Additional variables considered included healthy food, food safety, subjective norms and perceived behavioural control. Some studies introduce moderating variables, notably environmental concerns, influencing consumers’attitudes (De Brabandere et al., 2022;De Canio et al., 2021; Hornibrook et al., 2015;Siraj et al., 2022). Additionally, various studies examine different mediator variables, with one variable acting both as a mediator and a moderator, such as the intention to purchase labelled products (Thøgersen et al., 2010;Siraj et al., 2022). EJMBE 33,4 434 The most frequently studied consequences reflecting the effectiveness of an eco-label in the food sector are related to the following components of the TPB: attitude, purchase intention and purchase behaviour. Purchase intention and behaviour were the main constructs studied (see Table A.VII). 4.2.1 Analytical methods. Of the 32 papers analysed, three were focused groups (Eldesouky et al., 2020;Hornibrook et al., 2015;Sirieix et al., 2013), and one was a conceptual proposition (Acuaye et al., 2015). The most widely used methodology is regression analysis, which includes mediation regression analysis, moderation regression analysis and Tobit/ Logit models (see Table A.VIII). 4.3 Future research agenda 4.3.1 Theory research agenda. Amos et al. (2019) suggested exploring the health halo effect in eco-label perceptions for more realistic product evaluations. Chen (2020) highlighted the importance of comparative studies in sustainable food consumption for deeper theoretical and managerial insights. D’Souza et al. (2021) underscored their contribution to consumer decision-making dynamics regarding eco-labels, offering groundwork for future studies on consumer self-confidence and green purchasing intent. De Magistris et al. (2015) urged theoretical insights for stronger findings in their study on willingness to pay for canned tuna with corporate social responsibility (CSR) labelling. Van Doom and Verhoef (2011) echoed this need for more detailed studies with solid theoretical foundations. Zepeda et al. (2013) suggested a label consumer interaction framework for future research on consumer label choices. 4.3.2 Context research agenda. Recommendations emphasise the necessity for more research on diverse types or categories of labels, extending studies to different food and beverage products for comparative evaluations. Further exploration in various regional or cultural contexts and demographic differences is suggested. Addressing the growing array of eco-labels, future studies are urged to compare and study different types comprehensively. The global COVID-19 pandemic heightened environmental concerns, impacting perceptions and behaviours linked to eco-labelling, prompting the need for awareness in future research (Chen et al., 2023;De Canio et al., 2021). 4.3.3 Characteristics research agenda. Studies advocate exploring interactions between research variables like brand preferences and consumer behaviour, parental influence on purchase decisions, and the impact of manufacturers’policies and retailers”strategies. Additional areas include analysing attitudes, behavioural dispositions and aspects like scepticism, legitimacy, trust and confusion linked to eco-labels and certifying agencies. 4.3.4 Method research agenda. Studies have varied, with exploratory or experimental approaches aimed at understanding eco-labelling phenomena. There’s a need for real-world validation of established assumptions and findings. Additionally, there are calls for diverse experimental, laboratory approaches, research instruments and analytical techniques. 5. Discussion Our bibliometric analysis aligned with certain observations from prior reviews that overlapped with our focus. The growing motivation to research this topic resonates with trends found in studies by D orea et al. (2022),Maesano et al. (2019), and Manta et al. (2023). In analysing scientific output by country, our review mirrored findings from D orea et al. (2022) regarding the prevalence of publications from the US and Europe in eco-labelling. In our focused study on food eco-labelling, the primary countries of research were the US, Italy and the UK This echoes Maesano et al.’s (2019) observation of extensive research in Italy (given its focus on wine) and predominantly in European countries and the US. Food eco-labelling research agenda 435 Based on our TCCM analysis, this study delineated the consumer-related antecedents, frequently studied consequences and moderator/mediator variables in food eco-label research spanning 2 decades. To our knowledge, this comprehensive investigation represents the first of its kind in this domain. Our findings align with eco-labelling dimensions impacting consumer willingness to pay for environmentally conscious products (D orea et al., 2022). They underscore the TPB model’s components –attitude, perception, purchase intention and behaviour –influencing eco-label effectiveness in the food sector. Our study sheds light on consumer purchase behaviour in the food context (Maesano et al., 2019), emphasising the necessity for real-world research on labelled food purchase behaviour. Moreover, our findings echo concerns about sustainability comprehension and consumer confusion (Maesano et al., 2019), prompting further exploration into consumer knowledge, understanding and clarity regarding food eco-labels. This study also prompts inquiry into how information on food eco-labels is effectively communicated and disclosed to consumers. Based on our comprehensive literature review, numerous recommendations emerge for future research in this expansive field. The primary emphasis revolves around establishing more robust theoretical frameworks to comprehend the evolving dynamics. Additionally, the predominant suggestions advocate expanding research contextually, either through comparative studies or by exploring a wider array of food categories and diverse ecolabel types. 5.1 Theoretical implications While D orea et al. (2022) highlighted an upsurge in theoretical applications of environmental labelling, our examination of food eco-labelling in the business and management domain unveils openings for advancing, broadening and scrutinising theories. These encompass areas such as consumer behaviour, information and knowledge, environmental concerns, trust, packaging and willingness-to-pay in eco-labelling domains. Previous studies underscored the nuances of consumer behaviour, emphasising the necessity to appraise diverse eco-label attributes in real-life scenarios (Potter et al., 2021). Understanding how consumers engage with footprint eco-labels (Leach et al., 2016;Asioli et al., 2020) and assessing context’s impact on consumer behaviour (Maesano et al., 2019) remains paramount. Future investigations should extend the TPB (Chen, 2020;Siraj et al., 2022) to probe the effectiveness of various eco-label attributes in practical contexts. Similarly, our findings on information align with Maesano et al. (2019), highlighting its sway on consumer behaviour. Therefore, scholars could leverage the signalling heory (De Brabandere et al., 2022;Sigurdsson et al., 2022) to explore how information about food ecolabels is conveyed to and absorbed by consumers. Expanding on the knowledge aspect, Asioli et al. (2020) emphasised understanding consumers’comprehension levels of eco-labels. Our research echoes concerns about consumer confusion regarding food eco-labels, aligned with Manta et al. (2023) and Maesano et al.’s (2019) findings in business and management journals. Given these insights, future studies could leverage an extension of the cue utilisation theory. This theory explains how individuals gather and process information from their environment to make decisions or perform tasks. Utilising this framework can shed light on how the extent of consumers’ knowledge, understanding and confusion regarding eco-labels influences their behaviour. Certainly, our findings align with Maesano et al.’s (2019) conclusions about the influence of values and beliefs on consumers’attitudes toward sustainable food purchases. Grunert et al. (2014) also proposed this as a focal area for future research, highlighting that the usage of labels depends on consumers’overall sustainability concerns. To delve deeper, scholars could employ the attribution theory, which delves into how individuals perceive and explain the EJMBE 33,4 436 Cho, Y.N. and Baskin, E. (2018), “It’s a match when green meets healthy in sustainability labeling”, Journal of Business Research, Vol. 86, pp. 119-129, doi: 10.1016/j.jbusres.2018.01.050. Cho, Y.N. and Berry, C. (2019), “Understanding the effects of retailer- and manufacturer-provided sustainability labels on product evaluations and purchase-related outcomes”,Journal of Business Research, Vol. 100, pp. 73-85, doi: 10.1016/j.jbusres.2019.03.019. Darnall, N., Ji, H. and V azquez-Brust, D.A. (2018), “Third-party certification, sponsorship, and consumers’ecolabel use”,Journal of Business Ethics, Vol. 150 No. 4, pp. 953-969, doi: 10.1007/ s10551-016-3138-2. De Chiara, A. (2016), “Eco-labeled products: trend or tools for sustainability strategies?”,Journal of Business Ethics, Vol. 137 No. 1, pp. 161-172, doi: 10.1007/s10551-014-2510-3. Dekhili, S. and Achabou, M.A. (2015), “The influence of the country-of-origin ecological image on ecolabelled product evaluation: an experimental approach to the case of the European ecolabel”, Journal of Business Ethics, Vol. 131 No. 1, pp. 89-106, doi: 10.1007/s10551-014-2261-1. Delmas, M.A. and Lessem, N. (2017), “Eco-premium or eco-penalty? Eco-labels and quality in the organic wine market”,Business and Society, Vol. 56 No. 2, pp. 318-356, doi: 10.1177/ 0007650315576119. Ferreira, A.G. and Fernandes, M.E. (2022), “Sustainable advertising or ecolabels: which is the best for your brand and for consumers’environmental consciousness?”,Journal of Marketing Theory and Practice, Vol. 30 No. 1, pp. 20-36, doi: 10.1080/10696679.2021.1882864. Gidl€ of, K., Lahm, E.S., Wallin, A. and Otterbring, T. (2021), “Eco depletion: the impact of hunger on prosociality by means of environmentally friendly attitudes and behaviour”,Journal of Retailing and Consumer Services, Vol. 62, 102654, doi: 10.1016/j.jretconser.2021.102654. Green, A., Lewis, K.A., Tzilivakis, J. and Warner, D.J. (2017), “Agricultural climate change mitigation: carbon calculators as a guide for decision making”,International Journal of Agricultural Sustainability, Vol. 15 No. 6, pp. 645-661, doi: 10.1080/14735903.2017.1398628. Hallstein, E. and Villas-Boas, S.B. (2013), “Can household consumers save the wild fish? Lessons from a sustainable seafood advisory”,Journal of Environmental Economics and Management, Vol. 66 No. 1, pp. 52-71, doi: 10.1016/j.jeem.2013.01.003. Hauff, J. (2022), “The impact of knowledge on labeling schemes promoting sustainable investing”, Business Strategy and the Environment, Vol. 31 No. 7, pp. 2839-2853, doi: 10.1002/bse.3050. Kliem, L. and Wolter, H. (2022), “How do consumers perceive open-source seed licenses? Exploring a new credence attribute”,International Journal of Consumer Studies, Vol. 46 No. 6, pp. 2220-2238, doi: 10.1111/ijcs.12780. Kumar, P., Polonsky, M., Dwivedi, Y.K. and Kar, A. (2021), “Green information quality and green brand evaluation: the moderating effects of eco-label credibility and consumer knowledge”, European Journal of Marketing, Vol. 55 No. 7, pp. 2037-2071, doi: 10.1108/EJM-10-2019-0808. Kwak, L.E., Yoon, S.W. and Kim, Y. (2020), “Genetically modified crops’environmental impact and trust in eco-labels”,Australasian Marketing Journal, Vol. 28 No. 4, pp. 361-373, doi: 10.1016/j. ausmj.2020.06.013. Le, Y.H. and Manh, T.N. (2022), “Antecedents of pro-environmental behaviors: a study on green consumption in an emerging market”,International Journal of Asian Business and Information Management (IJABIM), Vol. 13 No. 1, pp. 1-17, doi: 10.4018/IJABIM.297848. Legendre, S. and Coderre, F. (2018), “The impact of altruistic attribution and brand equity in food label campaigns”,Journal of Product and Brand Management, Vol. 27 No. 6, pp. 634-646, doi: 10.1108/ JPBM-12-2016-1381. Lerro, M., Vecchio, R., Caracciolo, F., Pascucci, S. and Cembalo, L. (2018), “Consumers’heterogeneous preferences for corporate social responsibility in the food industry”,Corporate Social Responsibility and Environmental Management, Vol. 25 No. 6, pp. 1050-1061, doi: 10.1002/ csr.1519. Food eco-labelling research agenda 443 Limnios, E.M., Schilizzi, S.G., Burton, M., Ong, A. and Hynes, N. (2016), “Willingness to pay for product ecological footprint: organic vs non-organic consumers”,Technological Forecasting and Social Change, Vol. 111, pp. 338-348, doi: 10.1016/j.techfore.2016.05.009. Loureiro, M.L., McCluskey, J.J. and Mittelhammer, R.C. (2002), “Will consumers pay a premium for ecolabeled apples?”,Journal of Consumer Affairs, Vol. 36 No. 2, pp. 203-219, doi: 10.1111/j.1745- 6606.2002.tb00430.x. Lupu, N., Tanase, M.O. and Tontoroiu, R.A. (2013), “A straightforward x-ray on applying the ecolabel to the hotel business area”,Amfiteatru Economic Journal, Vol. 15 Special Issue No. 7, pp. 634-644, 10419/168805. Salo, H.H., Suikkanen, J. and Nissinen, A. (2020), “Eco-innovation motivations and ecodesign tool implementation in companies in the Nordic textile and information technology sectors”, Business Strategy and the Environment, Vol. 29 No. 6, pp. 2654-2667, doi: 10.1002/bse.2527. Schepers, D.H. (2010), “Challenges to legitimacy at the forest stewardship council”,Journal of Business Ethics, Vol. 92 No. 2, pp. 279-290, doi: 10.1007/s10551-009-0154-5. Taufique, K.M.R. and Islam, S. (2021), “Green marketing in emerging Asia: antecedents of green consumer behavior among younger millennials”,Journal of Asia Business Studies, Vol. 5 No. 14, pp. 541-558, doi: 10.1108/JABS-03-2020-0094. Woerd, F.V. and Brink, T.V.D. (2004), “Feasibility of a responsive business scorecard –a pilot study”, Journal of Business Ethics, Vol. 55 No. 2, pp. 173-186, doi: 10.1007/s10551-004-1900-3. Appendices The supplementary material for this article can be found online. About the authors Valeska V. Geldres-Weiss is Associate Professor at the Universidad de La Frontera in Chile. She earned her Ph.D. in Business Administration and Marketing from Seville University (Spain) and completed a postdoctoral program at the University of Sao Paulo (Brazil). Her research interests are international business, international marketing, sustainability and innovation. She has published in prestigious journals related to international business and international marketing. Carolina Nicolas is Associate Professor at the University of Santiago of Chile. She holds a Master in Marketing and a PhD degree in Business Administration from the University of Barcelona (Spain) and a Bachelor degree of Business Administration in University of Concepci on (Chile). She has published in research books and papers in journals, books and conference proceedings, including papers in journals indexed in the Web of Science –Journal Citation Reports. Carolina Nicolas is the corresponding author and can be contacted at: [email protected] Nathaniel P. Massa is resident senior faculty at the Department of Business and Enterprise Management, University of Malta –where he is also founding member on the Centre for Entrepreneurship and Business Incubation board. He holds a PhD in internationalisation and business management from the Adam Smith Business School, University of Glasgow; and an MBA from Henley Business School. Nathaniel’s research interests include international business and internationalisation, strategy and entrepreneurship –and is currently engaged on various research initiatives across Europe, the Americas and Asia. Spanning academia and industry through consultancy assignments in public and private sectors, Nathaniel is also involved in executive training for managers and practitioners in industry. For instructions on how to order reprints of this article, please visit our website: www.emeraldgrouppublishing.com/licensing/reprints.htm Or contact us for further details: [email protected] EJMBE 33,4 444