紐時賞析／標榜「氣候友善」的肉？監管機構加強審查宣傳口號是否誤導

‘Climate-Friendly’ Meat? Regulators Tighten Scrutiny of Label Buzzwords.

「氣候友善」的肉？監管機構加強審查宣傳口號

“Climate-smart.” “Regeneratively grown.” “Sustainable.”

「氣候智慧型」。「再生養殖」。「永續」。

If you’re wondering about all those labels on meat and poultry at the grocery store, so too, it turns out, is the U.S. Department of Agriculture.

如果你對店裡貼這類標籤的肉類禽類感到疑惑，其實美國農業部也有相同疑問。

The agency, in an update to its industry guidelines published this week, signaled that it’s paying closer attention to how companies back up the new environmental buzzwords and said it “strongly encourages” meat and poultry purveyors to get those claims verified by independent third parties.

該部會本周發布的行業指南更新表明，他們更密切關注企業如何支持新的環境流行用語，並「強烈鼓勵」肉類和家禽肉類生產商，讓這些用語由獨立第三方驗證。

Food companies have long had to get USDA approval for their labels. That has applied to terms such as “cage free” eggs or “grass fed” beef. The last update to the guidelines was in 2019.

食品公司的標籤長久以來都需要農業部批准，如「放養」雞蛋和「草飼」牛肉這類專門名詞都適用。指南上次更新是在2019年。

In this week’s update to the guidance,  the USDA took note of some of the latest environment-related marketing claims, such as “climate-friendly.” It said it “strongly encouraged” meat producers to provide the USDA’s food-safety arm with “data or studies to support environment-related claims on their label.”

在本周的指南更新中，美國農業部關注其中一些最新環境相關行銷用語，如「環境友善」。他們「強烈鼓勵」肉類生產商提供美國農業部食品安全部門「數據或研究，以支持標籤用語」。

The agency said third-party verification “helps ensure that such claims are truthful and not misleading,” although advocacy groups point out that these verification services are themselves of varying quality.

該部會表示，第三方驗證「會協助確保這類用語真實且沒有誤導」，儘管倡議團體指出，這些驗證服務本身就品質參差不齊。

The agency’s guidance follows growing concern by environmental advocates and consumer protection groups about what’s often called greenwashing, or the practice of making misleading claims about a product’s environmental impact. And it reflects growing scrutiny by courts and regulators around the world on the labeling of products aimed at consumers concerned about the environment.

該部會的指導方針，伴隨著環境倡議者和消費者保護團體日益憂心所謂的漂綠，或對產品的環境影響作出誤導性聲明這類行為。這也反映出全球法院和監管機構，對於針對關注環境的消費者產品標籤審查日益嚴格。

For instance, earlier this year, a national court in Denmark told Danish Crown, the country’s biggest pork producer, that it was misleading to label its pork “climate-controlled.” The company discontinued that phrase along with another climate claim.

例如今年稍早，丹麥國家法院告訴該國最大豬肉生產商「丹麥皇冠」，將豬肉貼上「環境控管」標籤具有誤導性。該公司已中止使用那個詞語及另一個氣候用語。

In New York, state Attorney General Letitia James has sued JBS, the meat multinational, for making “sweeping representations” about neutralizing its emissions in the coming years but offering “no viable plan.” JBS asked the court to dismiss the case.

在紐約，州檢察長詹樂霞起訴跨國肉品公司JBS，稱其針對未來幾年排放量中和做出「廣泛描述」，但「沒有提供可行計畫」。JBS請求法院駁回此案。

The marketing claims reflect how brands are trying to meet consumer demands. In the United States, sales of consumer products that are labeled green or sustainable are growing twice as fast as those that are not, according to research from New York University’s Stern School of Business.

行銷用語反映品牌試圖符合消費者要求。紐約大學史登商學院研究指出，在美國，貼有綠色或永續標籤的消費產品銷量成長速度是沒貼的兩倍。

文／Somini Sengupta　譯／羅方妤