Linguistic Battle: Europe's Plant-Based Food Labeling Debate

Last Update: 25th of June 2025

The food landscape is changing fast, and plant-based alternatives are no longer niche. They’ve become mainstream, featured on fast food menus and dinner tables around the world. But this shift isn’t just about what we eat, it’s also about the language we use to describe it. In Europe, the plant-based food labeling debate is heating up, raising questions about whether terms like “burger,” “sausage,” or “steak” should be used for products that contain no meat at all.

At the center of the plant-based food labeling debate is a compelling mix of language, law, and culture. Some argue that using familiar meat-related terms for plant-based products misleads consumers, while others view these restrictions as efforts to hold back innovation and reduce consumer choice. One thing is clear as we dive deeper into the issue – this debate goes beyond food. It reflects how language evolves alongside society and shapes the way we see the world.

The Meat of the Matter: What’s Happening in Europe?

Across Europe, countries are wrestling with the question of whether plant-based products should be allowed to use terms traditionally linked to meat. France has emerged as one of the most vocal participants in the plant-based food labeling debate. In 2024, the French government attempted to ban 21 meat-related words – such as “steak,” “fillet,” and “ham” – from being used on plant-based product labels. The official reason was to avoid misleading consumers.

But the proposal quickly drew criticism. Opponents argued that the move would hinder the fast-growing plant-based sector in a country renowned for its culinary creativity. By October 2024, the European Court of Justice (ECJ) intervened, ruling that such bans were not enforceable unless supported by clearly defined legal terms at the national level. The court emphasized that while countries can set their own rules, these must align with EU law. Specifically, the principle that product names must not mislead, but also cannot be restricted arbitrarily.

France isn’t alone in this. Italy, another major food nation, has introduced its own restrictions on meat-related terminology for plant-based items. This was part of a broader policy shift that also outlawed lab-grown meat. Meanwhile, Belgium considered similar measures but ultimately reversed course, choosing to let plant-based products retain familiar “meaty” labels.

Situation in Denmark

Unlike the heated discussions surrounding plant-based food labeling in France and Italy, Denmark has taken a more pragmatic and forward-thinking approach. Rather than restricting the use of meat-related terms like “burger” or “sausage” for plant-based alternatives, Denmark has focused on clarity, innovation, and consumer education. The country adheres to EU food labeling rules, which require that product descriptions be accurate and not misleading, but do not prohibit the use of terms like “veggie burger.” As long as the labeling clearly reflects the plant-based nature of the product, such terms are permitted.

Denmark also follows specific national guidelines. The Danish Veterinary and Food Administration requires product labels to be in Danish or a closely related language such as Norwegian or Swedish, ensuring that consumers have access to clear, trustworthy information. Under EU Regulation 1169/2011, certain terms like “milk” are reserved for dairy, but words like “burger” and “sausage” are not legally protected – allowing for more flexibility in plant-based labeling.

Beyond labeling, Denmark has taken a leading role in supporting the transition to more sustainable diets. In 2021, it launched the world’s first government-led action plan focused entirely on plant-based foods. This initiative offers subsidies for local crop production, branding support for plant-based companies, and a long-term strategy to strengthen the Danish plant-based food sector.

These efforts are backed by shifting consumer habits. A study from the University of Copenhagen found that nearly 37% of Danes had reduced their meat intake in the past year, reflecting a growing openness to plant-based alternatives. While this is slightly below the European average, the trend is upward. At the same time, market data shows that plant-based food sales have reached record highs, and modest price increases in plant-based meat alternatives—compared to steeper hikes in conventional meat—may further encourage consumers to make the switch.

Public institutions are also playing a role. The Danish Council on Climate Change has encouraged public sector canteens to lead by example by offering more plant-rich meals. Though Denmark has a strong tradition of meat consumption, these initiatives are helping to normalize plant-based eating. Together, they reflect a national strategy rooted in support, not restriction, positioning Denmark as a model for balancing consumer freedom, sustainability, and innovation.

Language Evolves: Why Words Matter

Why is the plant-based food labeling debate so important? Because words carry weight. They shape how we understand the world and connect with each other. In the context of food, terms like “burger” or “sausage” aren’t just labels – they’re part of our cultural vocabulary. They bring to mind tradition, familiarity, and comfort.

Those opposing restrictions on plant-based labels argue that language naturally changes alongside society. As plant-based diets become more common, it makes sense for the words we use to evolve, too. After all, we’ve long used terms like “milk” for products such as soy, almond, or oat milk, despite their non-dairy origins. Thanks to clear labeling, most consumers easily understand what they’re buying.

Limiting the use of words like “burger” or “steak” on plant-based products goes beyond semantics. It’s about inclusion and visibility. These familiar terms help plant-based foods become part of everyday food culture. Without them, critics say, plant-based producers are at a disadvantage – while traditional meat companies maintain the upper hand.

Consumer Confusion or Market Manipulation?

Supporters of labeling bans often argue they’re acting in consumers’ best interest. They claim that terms like “veggie burger” or “plant-based sausage” could mislead shoppers into thinking they’re buying meat-based products. But is that really the case?

Research suggests otherwise. A study published in Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences (PNAS) found that consumers are rarely confused by plant-based items labeled with meat-related terms, especially when those labels include clear markers like “vegan” or “plant-based.” In fact, these familiar terms help consumers understand how the product is intended to be used. A “veggie burger,” for example, clearly refers to a patty meant for a bun – not a slab of tofu or a bowl of lentils.

Assuming that consumers can’t tell the difference underestimates their ability to read and interpret labels. Shoppers routinely navigate distinctions between “almond butter” and “peanut butter,” or “beef hot dogs” and “chicken hot dogs.” If anything, banning familiar terms could create more confusion by forcing producers to come up with awkward, unfamiliar names that mean less to the average buyer.

Plant-Based Progress: Why the Words Matter

The rise of plant-based products isn’t just a passing trend – it’s a response to urgent global challenges. As awareness grows around the environmental and ethical impacts of meat production, more people are turning to plant-based alternatives. These products are crafted to mimic the taste, texture, and overall experience of eating meat, while aiming to reduce harm to the planet.

For plant-based companies, using familiar terms like “burger” or “steak” is key to showing what their products are meant to replace. Without that language, consumers may be unsure about what they’re buying or how to use it. Imagine reading a menu that offers a “round patty of textured vegetable protein” instead of a “veggie burger.” It’s not only less inviting, but it also creates an unnecessary barrier for curious eaters.

Restrictions on this kind of language seem less about protecting consumers and more about protecting traditional meat producers. By limiting the words plant-based brands can use, governments risk holding back innovation in one of the food industry’s fastest-moving sectors. And in doing so, they risk disconnecting from public sentiment, which is increasingly embracing plant-based choices.

Finding a Middle Ground

So, what’s the best path forward in the plant-based food labeling debate? It comes down to clarity and transparency. Companies should be allowed to use meat-related terms for plant-based products, as long as it’s made clear that the product contains no animal ingredients. Labels like “veggie burger” or “plant-based sausage” strike a smart balance: they’re recognizable, practical, and honest.

Rather than enforcing blanket bans, governments should focus on promoting clear, informative labeling. This approach respects consumers’ ability to make informed choices and helps support the continued growth of the plant-based industry, an essential partner in addressing climate change and building a more sustainable food system.

Plant-based Food Labeling Debate: Looking to the Future

The plant-based food labeling debate is about more than just terminology – it reflects how we adapt to a world in transition. Like society itself, language evolves. As plant-based products become a more prominent part of everyday life, the words we use to describe them will naturally shift as well.

This isn’t just a European issue. Similar debates have unfolded around the world, from the United States and Australia to South Africa, where plant-based products are challenging the boundaries of traditional food language. Across regions, governments are struggling to balance cultural heritage, market dynamics, and sustainability goals.

Instead of pushing back against this change, we have an opportunity to embrace it. Letting plant-based products share the familiar language of traditional meat encourages innovation, broadens consumer choice, and supports a more sustainable future. Because in the end, labels are just the surface: The real change happens with what ends up on our plates.

The debate is far from settled, but one thing is certain: the future of food is being shaped not only in kitchens, but also in courtrooms, parliaments, and dictionaries. And if history has taught us anything, it’s that language will adapt – no matter how many legal challenges it faces along the way.