For years, food companies treated claims like "organic," "natural," "clean" and "fresh" as points of differentiation. Today, those same attributes are increasingly becoming expectations. As consumer scrutiny of ingredients, processing and food quality intensifies, the question is no longer whether brands should communicate these values—but which signals consumers still trust and are willing to pay for.
For more than two decades, U.S. food culture has steadily migrated toward these ideals. What was once the domain of a relatively small, highly engaged consumer segment has become a mainstream expectation. Increased scrutiny of ingredient lists, growing skepticism of ultra-processed foods and heightened attention to food quality have all reinforced the importance of transparency and simplicity. More recently, the rise of GLP-1 medications has encouraged many consumers to prioritize nutrient density and overall quality over sheer quantity, while the Make America Healthy Again (MAHA) movement has amplified national conversations around health and the role of food systems.
This cultural shift is reflected in the hierarchy of claims consumers use when making purchase decisions.
Building the baseline
Today, the most powerful claims are those that signal these values around freshness and minimal processing. According to our research, 61% of shoppers report “fresh” is very important when selecting food or beverage products to purchase—and 42% of consumers say this is the most important attribute—next only to the baseline expectations of taste and price.* Short, recognizable ingredient lists and language like “no artificial ingredients” resonate because they align with a deeply ingrained consumer ideal: food that feels closer to its natural state.
Why organic still resonates
Against this backdrop, we sought to understand whether organic remains relevant to consumers—and how its meaning may be evolving. The answer is clear: organic continues to matter, but what consumers believe it represents is shifting.
Historically, consumers defined organic primarily through the lens of safety: absence of pesticides, herbicides, hormones, antibiotics, artificial additives and GMOs. However, associations with many of these attributes have declined since 2024,* giving way to broader priorities around how food is produced and what it signals about overall product quality.
Today, organic is increasingly associated with concepts such as less processed, clean and fresh.* These perceptions are now nearly as relevant as many of the attributes traditionally linked to organic certification. Rather than replacing organic's historical meaning, they expand it—connecting organic to the broader cultural values that increasingly guide food decision-making.
Why trust still requires verification
The relevance of USDA Organic certification has been hotly debated in recent years as consumer expectations have expanded beyond what the label was originally intended to guarantee. But despite evolving conversations around sustainability, regenerative agriculture and clean labels, organic remains one of the most intuitive signals of product quality with 23% of shoppers reporting “organic/USDA organic” is very important when selecting food or beverage products to purchase.*
As more brands adopt language around clean ingredients, responsible production and food quality, consumers face a growing challenge: determining which claims are credible. In this environment, third-party certification becomes increasingly valuable.
Our research finds that consumers continue to place greater confidence in the USDA Organic seal than in manufacturer-led language or implied claims about organic practices.* The certification serves as a trusted shortcut, supporting confident decision-making in an environment crowded with competing messages.
This trust translates into tangible value. In categories where organic is a meaningful purchase criterion—such as produce and dairy—a significant segment of consumers is still willing to pay a premium. Price sensitivity has not disappeared, but when organic aligns with category expectations and perceived personal relevance, the value equation continues to hold.
Moving beyond “meets expectations”
None of this means that organic—or any other claim—automatically creates differentiation.
The same cultural forces that have strengthened demand for fresh, real and less processed foods have also normalized these expectations. As more products enter the market with health-forward positioning, consumers increasingly view many of these attributes as prerequisites rather than advantages.
This creates a more challenging environment for brands because simply adopting the "right" claims is no longer enough. Those claims must also be visible, credible and aligned with category expectations. Organic, freshness cues and clear nutritional benefits are not interchangeable; each plays a distinct role depending on the product context and consumer mindset.
The bottom line
Consumers are not looking for an ever-expanding list of claims—they’re looking for signals they can trust.
As fresh, real and less processed foods become baseline expectations rather than differentiators, success will depend less on adding new messaging on-pack and more on communicating meaningful benefits with clarity and credibility.
For more insights like this, make sure you’re subscribed to Hartman Group’s weekly newsletter where we discuss emerging trends and share innovation thought-starters, strategic POVs and exclusive sneak-peaks of our latest research: https://www.hartman-group.com/subscribe
*Source: Claims and Cues 2026: Navigating Category Attributes, Hartman Group