Flowers make people happy. They bring colour, atmosphere and emotion - at home, at work, for a celebration or a farewell. But alongside that emotional value, consumers are becoming increasingly critical.
Whereas people have long made conscious choices when it comes to food, similar questions are now being asked about flowers. And that poses a challenge for growers, traders, and florists alike. Negative media coverage about CO₂ and pesticides weighs heavily on the sector’s image, even though major improvements are already being made - in areas such as energy, water use, and biological crop protection, but also regarding space constraints and labour migration.
The idea that “it won’t come to that” no longer holds true. Several Dutch municipalities have already taken concrete steps. Last year, the city of Zutphen decided to stop giving fresh bouquets to couples celebrating their 50th, 60th, or 70th wedding anniversaries. In The Hague and Amersfoort, sustainable alternatives are increasingly being sought for official occasions instead of traditional flowers. The reason: concerns about the environmental impact of cut flowers.
“The CO₂ emissions of an average bouquet amount to around 4 kilograms - comparable to driving 20 kilometres by car. Many flowers are imported from outside Europe, where pesticides are used that are banned here. And after a week, they often end up in the bin,” reported the Algemeen Dagblad.
Research by Royal Flora Holland in the Netherlands, Germany, France and the United Kingdom shows that consumers are becoming less positive about the sector’s efforts. Key concerns include pesticides, CO₂ emissions and energy use, plastic packaging, and – in some countries – working conditions. At the same time, price and quality remain decisive. A bouquet must look fresh, appealing and last long. Only then does sustainability come into play.
For Britta van der Meer (43), who works at a mid-sized accountancy firm and loves both flowers and nature, flowers mean more than decoration. “Flowers make me happy. I often buy them privately on weekends, but they’re also given at work - for a jubilee, a retirement, or simply to surprise someone. They brighten things up - at home and at the office.”
For Britta, flowers are both a luxury and a given. “Of course, flowers cost money and aren’t essential. But I love them so much that I still buy them regularly. A bouquet feels like a treat, but also something that belongs in my home.”
When it comes to sustainability, Britta thinks about it with food, sometimes with clothing - less so with flowers. “Honestly, I never really thought about it. Until I read in the media that flowers might contain lots of chemicals and use a lot of energy. Then I thought: that’s not really what you want on your table. You want something beautiful that also feels responsible.”
In the shop, however, the choice is often practical. “If a sustainable bouquet looks less beautiful than another, I’ll still pick the prettier one. But if they both look good, then sustainability does make a difference. I’m happy to pay a little extra, just like I do for organic products at the supermarket.”
Many consumers also want convenience: they expect the sector to take responsibility, so they can enjoy their purchase without guilt. Research confirms this picture. Consumers are increasingly paying attention to CO₂ emissions, pesticides and packaging. Yet price and quality remain key. Awareness is growing, but the sector must deliver transparency and choice.
This is where a grower like Porta Nova comes in. They show that real improvement starts with conviction. Their Red Naomi rose is not only beautiful but comes with a calculated and validated footprint - making the story tangible and trustworthy.
For florists, the role is different: ask questions. Where do my flowers come from? Which products are demonstrably more sustainable? By asking these questions to your suppliers – and passing the story on in your shop - you make a difference.
Conversations with consumers show: they still buy with their eyes, but if a sustainable alternative looks just as good, the choice is quickly made. And most are willing to pay a little more, as long as quality and appearance are equal.
The term “footprint” means something to most consumers - especially in the context of personal CO₂ emissions. But the fact that growers already calculate the footprint of their flowers is still largely unknown. Britta: “That surprises me. I think it’s great that they do that. It would be nice if I, as a consumer, could see that information, so I can compare.” A tag, QR code or message from the florist could make all the difference - offering not just flowers, but trust.
Consumers are on their way, but not quite there yet. Price and beauty remain more important than sustainability. Still, pressure from media, NGOs and retailers is growing: the demand for responsible flowers will only increase.
For Britta, the emotional value of flowers comes first: colour, atmosphere, joy. But she’s open to a deeper story. She wants to know what she’s buying - just like with food or clothing.
The future of the flower sector therefore lies in combining beauty with transparency. A rose that not only stays beautiful for long, but also demonstrably has less impact. The question is: how soon will consumers get that story - and who will take the first step? The Plants and Flowers Foundation Holland, the grower, the trader, or the florist? Or... will we do it together?
