- The Yuka, Ettiquetable and Open food facts consumer applications, the Marmiton recipe site, the food delivery startup Foodcheri… In total, ten food players are launching their eco-score this Thursday.
- This environmental display, in the form of a rating from A to E, will be affixed to the food products that these players offer. With the idea of informing the French about the environmental impact of the products they consume.
- To do so, this eco-score is mainly based on “Life cycle analysis”, a method developed by the Agribalyse working group and managed by Ademe. But which has its limits, point out the NGOs.
We now know the Nutri-score , this note on food products on the shelves implemented in France since 2016 and which displays their nutritional value. From A on a dark green background, for the most virtuous, to E on a red background, for the dunces.
Using the same code, a collective of ten food actors – of Yuka to Marmiton , via Foodcheri or l ‘organic online grocery store La Fourche – officially launch this Thursday an eco-score. The idea, this time, is to give at a glance the environmental impact of food products. “It is not only an educational tool, warns Shafik Asal, co-founder of consulting firm ECO2 Initiative , also a member of the collective. It also aims for change, by directing consumers towards more eco-responsible food and by pushing manufacturers and sellers to be more transparent. “
A step ahead of the government?
This eco-score is now displayed on Foodcheri’s take-out meals, the recipes offered by Marmiton, 2. 415 food references offered by La Fourche… Above all, Open Food Facts association (to see as the Wikipedia of the product sheet, also in the collective), calculated the eco score over 240. products. “Or about a good third of those referenced in our database and found in France”, indicates Pierre Slamich, its co-founder.
law relating to the fight against waste , published in February 2020, provides for the entry into force end 2020 of an environmental label on food products. These ten food players are therefore taking the lead. “We are an independent collective and our eco-score did not have any endorsement from the Ministry of Ecological Transition,” says Shafik Asal.
In other words, we could quickly end up with two “eco-scores”, or even more if other private actors launch their own initiatives. Not a problem in the eyes of the collective, which ensures that “several initiatives can coexist while waiting for an official environmental display.”
Life cycle analysis, first pillar of the note
This plurality of voices and approaches seems all the more desirable since there is no method that is unanimously accepted today to account for the environmental impact of food products. To calculate their eco-score, these ten food players mainly rely on Agribalyse work , a database developed over the past ten years by a group of experts led by Ademe (Environment and Energy Management Agency ) .
Agribalyse seeks to measure the environmental impact of agricultural and food products by reasoning in terms of life cycle analysis (LCA). Clearly, “the method does not focus only on the production phase, but takes into account all the stages through which a product passes, from fork to fork, explains Shafik Asal. For the environmental impact, Agribalyse is not only interested in CO2 emissions, but takes into account the pollution of the air, water, soil… ”
Agribalyse is thus based on fourteen environmental indicators and gives, for 2. 415 product categories, a score noted on 100. “A large scientific work potentially very useful but which cannot be used in the current state, because it includes limits, of which the Ademe is aware besides”, explains Christophe Hurbin, co-founder of MyLabel , an application to help more sustainable consumption.
Six criteria to erase the limits of Agribalyse
Seventeen environmental associations expressed concern about these limits last December. They already pointed to the poor and incomplete consideration of damage to biodiversity and the impact of pesticides in LCA. “This method also measures the environmental impacts per kilo or liter of product, in other words according to yields, regrets Agathe Gignoux, head of public and legal affairs for CIWF France, animal welfare association . This gives a significant advantage to intensive agriculture, which for the same quantity of raw materials used will produce more than organic agriculture. But the latter has other advantages in terms of biodiversity or animal welfare. However, these two points are not included in the indicator. »
To counter these limits, the eco-score launched this Thursday completes the LCA with six additional criteria that allow the rated product to generate bonus points or, on the contrary, to have penalty points subtracted. “We take into account the labels, the origin of the products, the environmental policy of the producing country [en s’appuyant sur l’indice établi par l’université de Yale], list François Martin, co-founder of Yuka. We are also adding a “threatened species” criterion, yet another on the recyclability of the packaging, or the seasonality of the ingredients. “
The method optimal still to find?
Sufficient? Agathe Gignoux remains on her guard. “For example, it seems very important to us to take into account the mode of production [agriculture bio, conventionnel, élevage en plein air…] in the preparation of the note”, she slips in particular. “We do it through the criteria of labels,” answers Shafik Asal. He can give up to 000 additional points, awarded according to the level of commitment and the environmental benefits that the label allows to estimate. And these labels, often, are attached to a particular production model. A red label beef should for example be fed mainly grass. “
Another fear pointed out by Agathe Gignoux, more global this time, is that environmental labeling” amounts to putting environmental issues in competition. as important as each other ”. “The risk then is that the weak points of a product are outweighed by its strong points and that the vast majority of products end up in a soft stomach, with a score that is neither too good nor too bad. Environmental labeling would then no longer be of any help to consumers. »
In the eco-score launched this Thursday, the Nutella spread thus collects a not too bad” C “despite the use palm oil in its recipe . Enough to prove Agathe Ginoux right? The collective justifies the note: “The brand would have lost points in this area a few years ago. But it now supplies itself with certified sustainable palm oil and is considered 20200122 like a good student in this area. ”