Is it easier to eat healthily or shop sustainably when the label does the thinking for us? Can a simple A-to-G rating change how we shop for household devices?
These basic questions hint at something bigger: a new policy mindset gaining traction within the EU, one where Behavioural Insights help align policy design with the realities of human decision-making. This blog post explores how labels are being used as a practical example of BI in action, shaping consumer choices, and informing EU policymaking.
Making policy work: Behavioural Insights in action
In the latest edition of the European Commission’s Better Regulation Toolbox, Tool #69 presents Behavioural Insights (BI) as a key emerging method to improve policymaking. Grounded in evidence about how people really think and act, BI help to identify what drives behaviour and how it can be shifted – especially when traditional tools fall short. By studying real-world behaviour through observation, experiments, and data analysis, this approach has the potential to make policies more effective, especially when outcomes hinge on human action. Decision makers are therefore able to go beyond simply asking what should be done, towards understanding how people are likely to respond.
Some of the most commonly used behavioural approaches in policymaking include nudges, default settings (such as opt-in or opt-out schemes), timely reminders, and social norm messaging, with the overall goal of guiding behaviour, without restricting the freedom of choice. For example, automatic enrolment in pension schemes has been proved to significantly boost participation rates, text message reminders are believed to improve attendance at medical appointments and energy bills that show how a household compares to its neighbours can nudge people to reduce or optimise consumption.
Labels are a notable example of how consumers can be influenced by applying BI. They are standardised, often visual cues that present essential product information, for example energy use, health content, or environmental impact. Whether on food packaging, household appliances, or cleaning products, labels are a clear example of BI in action. They don’t impose or prohibit; instead, they guide. By presenting clear, intuitive cues – such as colour codes or rating scales – they gently nudge consumers toward more informed, healthier, or sustainable choices.
What turns a label from information to impact?
In the real world, faced with information overload and limited time, humans rely on mental shortcuts – meaning that how information is framed often matters more than what it says. By leveraging cognitive conditions that respond to techniques such as priming and salience, labels can therefore function as cognitive tools, helping consumers overcome behavioural barriers, for example impulsivity, procrastination, or the gap between good intentions and everyday choices. Interestingly, labels also have a secondary effect: they encourage producers to adopt better business practices, such as improving transparency, ensuring ethical sourcing, and implementing more responsible production methods, thereby reinforcing consumer-driven market shifts.
The key to making labels work lies in using surveys, market research, and analysis of megatrends to understand consumer behaviour and identify areas where there is space to influence choices. Behavioural experiments and sales data have the potential to provide insights into which labels work best, guiding adjustments and ensuring that policies are achieving their desired impact. This approach is particularly relevant in domains where everyday individual choices aggregate to large-scale societal challenges, such as climate change, public health, sustainable consumption, and consumer protection.
The role of labels in the EU
In the European Union, the use of labels is widespread, both through harmonised schemes – such as energy ratings and organic certification – and through a variety of non-harmonised labels that reflect regional or sector-specific priorities. These labels are used extensively across industries to provide consumers with critical information and ensure that companies meet regulatory or consumer expectations. Whether standardised or voluntary, these labels play a pivotal role in guiding consumer choices and fostering a more sustainable market.
The EU Energy Label is a prime example of how BI can be utilised to nudge consumers towards more sustainable choices without restricting their freedom. The label, widely recognised by its colour-coded scale from dark green (A) to red (G), has existed in different formats since 1994 with the goal of helping consumers to quickly identify the energy performance of household appliances. This visual cue – anchored in both colour and alphabetical classification – has been shown to effectively influence consumer preferences, particularly by drawing attention to the energy efficiency class rather than technical data such as annual electricity consumption, which tends to be overlooked. According to 2019 Eurobarometer surveys the energy label is well known by EU citizens and around 79% of them affirmed to have been influenced by it when buying labelled products. In 2021, the EU reformed the old label: A+, A++, and A+++ categories were replaced by a simplified A–G scale to restore clarity and encourage technological innovation, making room for genuinely high-performing products at the top of the scale. This change is an example of policymaking informed by BI, particularly in response to consumer feedback. Surveys indicated that the previous system was confusing for consumers, making it difficult to distinguish between products with varying levels of efficiency. BI showed that simplifying the rating system to a clear A–G scale would enhance consumer understanding and help them make better-informed decisions.
The Nutri-Score is an additional example of how labels can be designed and integrated into products to influence consumer behaviour. Its goal is to translate complex nutritional data into a simple, intuitive visual format using a dual chromatic (green to dark orange) and alphabetical (A to E) scale. The core behavioural aim is twofold: (1) to nudge consumers towards healthier food choices by reducing cognitive load, and (2) to motivate producers to improve product composition to achieve more favourable scores. By evaluating the overall nutritional profile of a product, balancing components generally associated with health benefits (such as fibre and protein) and those linked to health risks when consumed in excess (e.g. sugar and saturated fat), the Nutri-Score has been shown to increase not only purchases of healthier items, but also overall spending and even store profits.
While the Nutri-Score is in voluntary use across parts of the EU, Member States remain divided over whether it should be adopted as a harmonised front-of-pack label. In some countries, for example Italy, the Nutri-Score has faced strong resistance, particularly due to its penalisation of Geographical Indications products – many of which are traditional, animal-based foods with high fat or salt content. Critics argue that it oversimplifies food quality by focusing on nutrient content per 100 grams – a metric that can be misleading for products typically consumed in small quantities, such as olive oil. In light of these debates, the EU has been exploring options for a different harmonised front-of-pack labelling system, though a legislative proposal has not yet been published.
Beyond the Energy Label and the Nutri-Score, other front-of-pack schemes leverage BI. There may already be some familiarity with the EU Ecolabel – one of the oldest marks of high environmental standards in Europe – but new types of labels are now appearing, such as the new harmonised version of waste-sorting labels. From nutritional facts to energy efficiency charts and environmental logos, Eco-Score labels, carbon footprint tags, organic certifications, and Fair Trade marks are quietly shaping the way we shop, eat, and live. Whether it’s picking detergent that pollutes less or a more energy-efficient fridge, labels work by making complex decisions simpler, clearer, and more intuitive. This approach aligns with the EU Better Regulation Guidelines, which aim to improve policymaking through evidence-based practices such as BI.
But could labels ever backfire?
While typically helpful, labels can sometimes have unintended effects. According to some studies, combining multiple labels – for instance, nutrition and carbon scores – may dilute their impact or even lower product appeal, especially among consumers who perceive trade-offs between health, taste, or sustainability. Some labels risk oversimplifying complex realities, as seen in critiques of Nutri-Score, potentially leading to misleading assumptions about a product’s overall value. Others, for example energy-efficiency tags, can encourage premature replacement of still-functional items – an ironic twist on sustainability.
In fact, more generally, while BI offer powerful tools for promoting sustainable consumer choices, they also raise important ethical concerns. Poorly designed interventions, for example, can use automatic default settings that steer choices without full awareness, or complicate certain actions such as unsubscribing from services. As labels and nudges become part of everyday life, ensuring they respect autonomy and informed decision-making is essential. According to the OECD’s Good Practice Principles for Ethical Behavioural Science in Public Policy, responsible use of BI starts with confirming that interventions align with policy goals and improve public welfare. Transparency, stakeholder involvement, and anticipating unintended consequences are key. Protecting privacy, ensuring fairness, and maintaining dignity across groups is critical. Most importantly, as interventions scale, policymakers must remain accountable, ensuring that BI respect individual autonomy and foster public trust, with a clear commitment to ethical integrity in both design and implementation.
As studies in this area continue to evolve, other research may reveal further insights. However, these challenges don’t imply that labels are the problem, but rather that they must be part of a smarter policy mix, guided by BI and backed by robust data. When done correctly, labels can empower consumers; when done poorly, they may do the opposite. Looking ahead, a smart use of BI such as labels could extend to new areas, for example the fashion industry, where they might inform consumers about the environmental footprint and ethical standards of clothing production.
BI intervention – if well-constructed – might become an essential tool in regulatory efforts to foster informed, responsible consumer behaviour across a variety of fields.
Declaration of AI Assistance: generative artificial intelligence tools have been used to review and correct wording and potential spelling errors in this blog post. The final analysis, arguments, critical insights, and conclusions are the result of the author’s work and remain under their sole responsibility.
