Consumers are confused about sustainability, and the industry is to blame

When it comes to the food we produce, we need transparency and clarity. So it’s troubling to discover one in seven people believe there is no clear definition of “sustainable food”, according to Ecotone’s new research  – though perhaps not entirely surprising.

This statistic highlights a growing confusion in the marketplace, where the term ‘sustainable’ is increasingly used as a marketing buzzword rather than a meaningful indicator of food quality and environmental responsibility.

At first, it had meaning. Sustainable meant the better choice. But we’ve drifted far from where we began as an industry. The lack of a clear, standardised definition for sustainable food poses several challenges for consumers, businesses, and the environment.

More importantly, it undermines truly impactful terms like ‘organic’ and ‘biodiversity’, which offer well-defined, scientifically grounded solutions to the environmental and health crises our world faces today.

It’s time to abandon nebulous words that create confusion. We need to set the record straight and help shoppers make informed choices, with food they can actually trust.

The ambiguity of ‘sustainable food’

The term ‘sustainable food’ is often used to imply environmentally-friendly practices, but it can mean very different things to different companies – and even to consumers themselves.

For some, sustainability might mean reducing carbon emissions in transportation. For others, it could involve using renewable energy or cutting down on plastic packaging. While all of these initiatives are positive steps, they fail to address the deeper, systemic issues in our industrialised food production systems.

Many conventional farming methods, which rely heavily on synthetic pesticides, fertilisers, and monoculture cropping, can still be labelled as ‘sustainable’ under loose definitions. These practices may improve certain metrics, like yield efficiency or water use, but they fail to revitalise the soil, protect ecosystems, or promote long-term environmental health.

Well-established definitions

Terms like ‘organic’ and ‘biodiversity’, on the other hand, carry clear, well-established definitions that are rooted in measurable standards and science. Organic farming is governed by strict regulations that prohibit synthetic chemicals, pesticides, and genetically modified organisms (GMOs). It also promotes natural farming practices such as crop rotation, composting, and biological pest control, all of which work to support the soil and promote ecosystem health.

Biodiversity – the variety of species within an ecosystem – plays an equally critical role in sustainable food production. Organic farming practices emphasise crop diversity and habitat preservation, creating more resilient ecosystems that support both human and environmental health.

In fact, our study found 30% of people define sustainable food as ‘organic’. It’s resonating, and it needs to, because it is the future of food.

Informed choices

Our research shows UK shoppers want to make informed, ethical choices. On average, consumers dedicate 30% of their weekly grocery shop to items which positively favour the environment and health. Imagine how much higher this could be if we were clearer and more consistent with precise definitions?

It’s time to make terms like ‘organic’ and ‘biodiversity’ central to the food conversation – because they are the ones that truly make an impact. These terms are not just marketing jargon – they represent a holistic, scientifically grounded approach to farming that protects the environment and promotes human health.

Let’s give shoppers the clarity they deserve.