Can marketing magic help food waste disappear?

In 2022, the Japanese artist Ichio Usui fixed googly eyes to the sort of food that often gets wasted –aubergines, squash, pineapples and the like. Japan has one of the highest food waste per capita figures in the world, so his series ‘Silent voice’ aimed to dramatise the problem. “I think we need to understand this problem, and people tend to empathise more with something that has eyes or resembles some sort of face,” he said.

Eyes are certainly well recognised as one of the most powerful tools in advertising. They convey emotion and draw attention. They can tell a story. And suck us in. “When we see someone’s eyes in an ad, we instantly feel a connection,” wrote US-based optometrists Urban Optiks in an August blog. “This makes us more likely to remember the product or message being advertised.”

So, could this be used to sell sustainability – or specifically to help reduce food waste? Absolutely, according to marketing researchers at Bryant University in the US. “It’s not about making the produce less ugly. It’s about making it more human,” they explain on the back of their paper published in the journal Psychology & Marketing in August – ‘From ugly to attractive: Leveraging anthropomorphism to increase demand for irregular‐appearing produce’.

For years, marketers offering discounts for irregular items or explaining the environmental effects of food waste to encourage consumers to overlook aesthetic flaws in everything from carrots and cucumbers to tomatoes and tangerines. What they’ve found is that undoing the years and billions spent on selling us perfect produce is hard.

Exemplar theory is a psychological concept that suggests people categorise objects and ideas by comparing new stimuli to memories of past experiences, or ‘exemplars.

“With exemplar theory, humans are very, very exacting and there’s almost no room for error,” explains Kacy Kim, associate professor of marketing at Bryant. “They have something ideal in their mind and they can't deviate from that.”

Unless it has some googly eyes stuck to it, that is. By anthropomorphising ugly fruits and vegetables, for example, it’s possible to “short circuit” the exemplar-based response and replace it with something kinder and more subjective, say Kim and her colleagues. “When we evaluate a non-human object, we are generally very critical and quick to say this is ‘bad’ if we notice an asymmetry or abnormality,” says Kim. “However, when we look at a human, we are usually more generous, and we tend to avoid the usual binary. We might say, ‘Oh, she has unique eyes,’ or ‘Their hair is interesting,’ or even ‘They seem like their heart is beautiful.’” 

Bryant’s experiment, which used an image of a lowly, lumpy eggplant, some of those googly eyes, and Photoshop wizardry, showed the ocularly-enhanced produce received a significant bump in purchase intention compared to the eyeless control images. However, there was no effect if the eyes were placed on more perfect produce.

Adding names also helped. People cared less about the three heads a strawberry had so long as it was called Jordan, for example. And the effect was more marked if the apple or avocado came from a corporate giant than a local supplier. “The differences occur because consumers expect corporate farms to conform to standardised aesthetic norms but expect local farms to market irregular-appearing produce,” the researchers wrote. 

They aren’t the only academics to have been looking at how to sell unappealing apples. ‘I know I’m ugly, but please listen to my story,’ is the title of a paper published in the Journal of Consumer Behaviour in October. In two studies the researchers, from Minnesota State University Mankato in the US, showed that ‘storytelling’ combined with marketing tactics like coupons “significantly increases consumers’ consumption of unattractive produce”.

Promotions like ‘but 2 get 1 free’ were actually shown to be “ineffective’ on their own. “We found that instead of highlighting a great deal, the discounted produce can enhance concerns consumers may have about quality and taste, thus decreasing the desire to purchase the unattractive produce,” they wrote. What’s more, the fact they are buying three items magnifies any quality or taste concerns, they add.

This is where the ‘story’ can have an impact. Harmony Farm, a fictional brand, was created along with accompanying marketing mock-ups that told the “journey” of the “unique” and “irresistible” oranges from “rejection to recognition”. ‘Taste’ and ‘premium’ and ‘freshness’ were also mentioned in the adverts. A nod to how good these fruits were expected to taste is a key part of the promotional puzzle, notes Sophie Attwood, a behavioural scientist and consultant at Behaviour Global who wasn’t involved in the research (but posted about it on social media). Promotion of vegan diets can be based on aspiration, she explains, but that’s much harder to do with food waste. 

There is the view companies have missed opportunities to connect with consumers on topics like food waste. Brands should stop apologising for wonky veg and recycled packaging just because it looks different, Nicolas De Resbecq, marketing expert at New York-based offline marketing specialist Oppizi, explains. “They need to own it,” he adds, citing how Intermarché in France ran a “fun” campaign that “made people feel like they were getting something valuable, not doing a favour for the environment”.

There has been no shortage of time, money and energy spent on reducing food waste but it tends to be ad hoc and perhaps even a little limp. Food manufacturers and retailers have made decent inroads in the waste created from farm gate to shelf, but either end of that is where the bigger problems lie.

Are brands embarrassed to put their marketing might fully behind misshapen produce, despite the environmental and economic benefits? It’s possible. Many will not want farm waste in the spotlight as it will attract questions and expose ugly truths about the exacting standards of retailers and the cut-throat nature of farmer contracts (research by charity Feedback found that rejection based on aesthetic imperfection, unfair trading practices, and overproduction were the three main causes of on-farm food waste).

Selling ugly produce is one thing; selling less produce is quite another. The links between over-consumption and waste are as strong as ever. Publicly, brands will say they want to be part of the solution rather than the problem. Bel Group, Kerry, Tesco, Unilever and Walmart are among the big players involved in the Consumer Goods Forum’s #TooGoodToWaste – a food loss and waste education campaign launched in 2023 that aims to spur faster progress among CGF members and the millions of consumers they reach.

UK retailer Tesco is seen as a pioneer, having conducted eye-opening audits of the waste throughout its supply chain. Recent initiatives, detailed in the annual food waste reports it publishes voluntarily, include its ‘reduced in price, just as nice’ areas in 300 stores, as well as ‘use-up day’ – a new campaign launched in 2022 to help encourage households to cook a meal using up food already in their kitchen.

At Sainsbury’s, meanwhile, there have been efforts to encourage purchase of imperfect produce with ‘taste me, don’t waste me’ fruit and veg boxes, priced at just £2 ($2.57). In the Netherlands, supermarkets have been focusing on the categories with the biggest losses, like bread and pastries and fresh meat and fish. Yesterday’s bread is sold at discount prices, for example, while Albert Heijn, Jumbo, Lidl, Dirk and DekaMarkt are among those involved in the Shelf Life Coalition – through which signatories clarify ‘best before’ and ‘use by’ dates with a symbol on at least 50% of private-label products.

Unilever has launched ‘Meal reveal’, an AI-powered tool that allows consumers to scan their fridges for ingredients that can then be combined in recommended recipes (some of them that are of course helped by a dollop of its Hellmann’s mayonnaise). “Food waste is an unintended consequence of our busy lives,” said Hellmann’s global VP Christina Bauer-Plank. "People never set out wanting to throw food away.”

But still food keeps filling up bins. Attwood says there has been “loads of work done” on food waste reduction campaigns but it tends to be quite “bitty”. Measuring whether any of the approaches have stuck, and reduced food waste, is also hard to say. Progress reports on many of these initiatives are equally hard to find (the Dutch one includes an annual report). What’s wasted in people’s homes is more difficult to decipher still because it relies on consumers self-reporting, which is notoriously iffy (and that might also explain why brands don’t tend to include food waste in people’s homes within their Scope 3 carbon emissions).

Is now the time to strike, though? There is the cost-of-living crisis. Manufacturers and retailers are looking for quick wins to deliver Scope 3 emission reductions. And the regulatory net has begun to tighten (consider the food waste reduction targets just set at EU level through the waste framework directive). Many countries are also sweating over food security (waste less and you have to produce and import less, too).

Some start-ups have already got the jump on the competition. Marketing experts cite the UK’s Oddbox and Misfits Market in the US as examples. These work “because they make customers feel smart for choosing them, not like they’re making a lesser choice”, says Paul Drecksler, the founder of Shopifreaks, a weekly newsletter for e-commerce executives, marketing directors and investors.

The premium feel also offers an aspirational and ethical pull. “Grocery stores can follow suit by setting aside sections for items that aren't perfect or meal kits that come with extra ingredients,” adds Georgi Todorov, founder and CEO at Create & Grow, a digital agency. “Getting rid of food waste isn’t just a way to cut down on pollution – it’s also a way to build loyalty and make more money.” 

Marketers have also turned to influencers for a helping hand. “People buy stories, values and the feeling of being something bigger,” says Lindsey Jones, head of content at New Zealand iGaming destination KiwiBets, and “sustainability influencers have built trusting audiences”. They have cooked with upcycled ingredients and turned leftovers into gourmet meals. This is a pleasant turnaround from stories blaming these social media stars for generating food waste as hopeful followers tried to cook up perfect meals that were ideal for sharing on Instagram.

“The behaviour change potential of social media is clear,” said Professor David Halpern, chief executive of the UK-based Behavioural Insights Team (BIT) as he published research with Unilever showing the potential of social media to drive more sustainable behaviour, including a reduction in food wasted at home. “When your audience is on board and familiar with what to do […] it may be that all they need is that additional nudge, reminding them of why immediate action is needed,” BIT explained.

Influencers have also spotlighted the (growing number of) companies using surplus food. The pandemic seemed to give upcycled food a shot in the arm but this is no silver bullet to sustainable products. “[S]ome upcycled food can be environmentally and economically viable,” notes a briefing paper published in January by the University of Otago, New Zealand, but “evidence supporting the social benefits of upcycled food is limited and, in some situations, the upcycled food industry may have an unintended negative impact on food security”.

Though the sustainability claims need clearing up, upcycled foods are undoubtedly sexy right now. From sauces made with tomatoes that would otherwise have been tossed to high protein snacks made from leftover grain from beer production, these are stories that should whet the appetite of marketers. “Incorporating upcycled ingredients into product innovation is one of the most direct and scalable ways food brands can drive sustainability,” says Dan Kurzrock, founder and CEO of Upcycled Foods, which has just launched upcycled breads for Misfits Market’s Odds & Ends private label.

Upcycled snacks seem to be one of the categories consumers are particularly hungry for. This isn’t an easy time for the snacks category generally, though. There was a “slowdown” last year, according to PepsiCo chief executive officer, Ramon Laguarta, as he told analysts in February that the Doritos, Fritos and Lay’s maker’s “number one priority this year has been stabilising the category, making sure that consumers come back to the category”.

This could well be just the start, with snacks brands witnessing the rise of GLP-1 drugs like Ozempic and Wegovy. Perhaps there is a win-win here: smaller portions made from upcycled ingredients. Selling less is a hard sell but reducing food waste was never going to be easy. As Estelle Herrszenhorn, head of food system transformation at the UK charity Wrap, wonders: “Can marketers help people both buy what they need and use what they buy?”