Dark, milk, hazelnut… Here are the most environmentally responsible chocolate bars according to 60 million consumers.

Do you really know the environmental impact of a chocolate bar? From cultivation to processing and transport, this favorite product of our cupboards nevertheless emits greenhouse gases that are harmful to the planet: 17.11 kg of CO2 equivalent per kilogram of chocolate, according to the Agribalyse database developed by the Agency for Ecological Transition (Ademe). from: and the National Research Institute for Agriculture, Food and the Environment (Inrae). And the operating conditions are also problematic. thousands of children continue to work on cocoa, particularly in West Africa, which many NGOs lament. Faced with this dramatic observation, the magazine 60 million consumers attempts to shed light on the certifications and provenance of commercially available tablets in a test bench published in the latest issue, on newsstands this Thursday, October 26.

With that in mind, our colleagues analyzed 35 references on dark chocolate, milk chocolate and hazelnut-enriched. The first positive observation. only 8 tablets do not contain any actions or labels aimed at reducing cocoa’s strong environmental and social impact on the planet and people.

Guarantee a fairer income for producers

Good students in terms of social impact are, surprisingly, fair trade labels such as Fairtrade-Max Havelaar, which appears on the sheet of Monoprix extra fine milk chocolate, Fair for life, which can be found on the packaging of Alter Eco 70 : % dark chocolate and the Peasant Producers Symbol (SPP), featured on Ethiquable’s soft melt milk bar. The latter are committed to providing better pay for producers, who are heavily affected by inflation and rising production costs, as well as paying bonuses for some.

On the other hand, these same guarantees do not appear clearly and in detail in “Cocoa Life” from Mondelez (Milka, Côte d’Or), “Cocoa Plan” from Nestlé, or even in distributor labels such as Transparency cocoa from U. Which inevitably relegates their products to lower places on the test bench 60 million consumers .

Could do better for anti-deforestation commitments

On the environmental issue, the results are more mixed. The Journal of the National Consumer Institute denounces a particular logic of sustainability, which consists of producing more to pay producers better. “Yield growth rarely keeps pace with ecological standards,” our partners comment. The latter thus refer to the problem of deforestation caused by overexploitation and global overconsumption of cocoa, the victim of which is mainly West Africa.

In this regard, Guillaume Lesqueur, a cocoa expert at the International Cooperation Center for Agronomic Research Development (CIRAD), in a magazine interview, invites us to be wary of labels like the Rainforest Alliance, which pride themselves on having virtuous forest practices. but whose criteria (density of trees per hectare, diversity of protected species) “do not prevent deforestation”. But things are moving, as Europe intends to apply a “zero deforestation” guarantee to imported goods within two years.

The origin is still unclear

Another important dark point in this analysis is the origin of the cocoa, as well as the hazelnuts added to most bars. These two ingredients are really hard to trace because their origin is rarely mentioned or is too vague on the packaging. “In some bars, however, there is a ‘designation of origin’, which guarantees that the cocoa comes from one country. On the other hand, this reference says nothing about the quality of the cocoa, which varies greatly depending on the specifications used,” he laments. 60 million consumers in his columns. Among the most virtuous, the magazine once again mentions the labels SPP, Fairfor life, as well as the Bio Partenaire (Carrefour Bio) and the organic label (U Bio, Bio Village, Alter Eco). The latter also guarantees consumers and farmers who grow cocoa production without phytosanitary products.