New FSIS guidelines on environmental labeling claims: Key points

The US Department of Agriculture (USDA)’s Food Safety and Inspection Service (FSIS) has released updated guidelines regarding the substantiation of animal-raising and environment-related claims on meat and poultry product labels.

The guidelines, effective as of August 2024, are intended to enhance transparency and prevent greenwashing, the practice of using marketing claims to mislead the public about a company’s environmental performance.

As efforts to make the meat and poultry industries more environmentally sustainable gain traction, companies can use evolving guidelines to vet marketing claims and help avoid greenwashing risks.

Key points from FSIS guidelines on animal-raising labeling claims

Purpose and scope

The guidelines make clear that FSIS expects companies to substantiate animal welfare, animal pedigree, and environmental claims for meat and poultry product labels with supporting documentation or third-party certification.

Types of claims covered

• Environment-related claims: Claims like “sustainably farmed” and “carbon neutral” require substantial documentation, including environmental data or studies.
  
  
• Animal welfare claims: To use statements like “humanely raised” and “ethically raised,” the producer must maintain detailed documentation and, if certified by a third-party organization, the certifying entity’s name, web address, and logo.
  
  
• Breed claims: Products advertised as “Angus” or “Berkshire” beef must now be supported with documentation evidencing the animal’s breed by phenotype or genotype.
  
  
• Diet claims: Claims like “grass-fed” or “vegetarian-fed” require detailed documentation of the animals’ diet from birth to slaughter.
  
  
• Living or raising conditions claims: The proliferation of statements like “pasture-raised” and “free-range” is well documented, and FSIS expects comparable documentation substantiating the animals’ living conditions.
  
  
• Negative antibiotics use claims: The guidelines encourage supporting claims such as “raised without antibiotics” with sampling programs or third-party certifiers.
  
  
• Organic claims: Products bearing these claims must comply with USDA organic regulations and be certified by a USDA-accredited certifying agent.

The USDA’s greenwashing mitigation

Companies increasingly use environmental marketing claims to publicize their sustainability practices and appeal to more eco-conscious customers.

Environmentalists have long criticized the approval of labels like “climate-friendly beef,” arguing that such claims may mislead consumers about the significant greenhouse gas emissions associated with cattle.

Common meat and poultry claims flagged by activists include “sustainably raised” and “regenerative grazing,” which suggests benefits to soil health.

The main risk may not be regulators, however, but private plaintiffs. Environmental marketing claims may be difficult to quantify and substantiate, but FSIS does not review point-of-purchase materials.

Companies may not understand they have run afoul of applicable regulations until they find themselves sued by a consumer for false advertising or unfair trade practices.

In the guidelines, FSIS “strongly encourages” companies to obtain third-party certification and amass environmental data or studies (including soil and land variation or air quality studies and results) in support of such claims on their label.

Implications for organizations

Prudent organizations will be prepared to adjust their advertising practices based on these new guidelines if there are gaps. Key considerations include:

• Enhanced documentation: Organizations are encouraged to ensure all animal-raising and environmental claims are backed by comprehensive documentation.
  
  
• Third-party certification: Businesses may consider retaining credible third-party certifiers to substantiate claims, especially for complex representations about environmental benefits or reduced environmental impacts.
  
  
• Transparency: Organizations are encouraged to be transparent in their labeling practices to avoid misleading consumers and potential regulatory scrutiny. A good rule of thumb: What a label says is less important than whether it is clear enough that a reasonable consumer could not misunderstand the reality behind the claim.
  
  
• Compliance: Regularly reviewing and updating compliance procedures to align with FSIS guidelines and avoid (or swiftly parry) greenwashing accusations is encouraged.

By adhering to these guidelines, organizations can build consumer trust and avoid potential legal and reputational risks associated with misleading labeling practices.

For more on sustainability marketing claims on food labeling, please contact the authors.