What is a Michelin Green Star?
And why does it make even less sense than any other star? I do not know, you do not know, THEY do not know either, it seems.
In short?
I have no clue.
The fact that the Michelin back office does not know what to do with its latest creation, the Green Star, is quite visible in its manifest attribution and lack of coherent, measurable, standard and reliable criteria applicable across all restaurant businesses worldwide
Let me start by saying that the Green Star was a bad idea for Michelin.
Possibly pushed by its marketing department and some woke employees capturing a mounting loss of public affection towards Michelin expressed by younger generations, they decided to embark on a venture that is way beyond their abilities.
They are custodians of the status quo, sponsored by a tyre company that represents the whole Old World/Ancien Régime of individualism (the car is the epitome of individualism and antagonistic to anything collective: transport, solutions, societies).
And yet, in an almost agonising movement, they wanted to go green.
What is green?
It is the colour multinational companies decide to paint their action, symbols, discourse and public communication to change everything for nothing to change, as Gattopardo would say.
L’Étoile Verte MICHELIN est attribuée aux restaurants de la sélection du Guide MICHELIN, rôles-modèles en matière de gastronomie éco-responsable.
(The MICHELIN Green Star is awarded to restaurants selected by the MICHELIN Guide, role models in eco-responsible gastronomy.)
The French page is lapidary: The selected Green Star restaurants are role models for gastro-ecological responsibility in the restaurant business.
This is a short, concise, and management-friendly sentence—with a pneumatic (!) void behind it, as it is only repeated in the French version of this page (I consulted the French, British, Italian, German, and Portuguese versions).
If it were true, it could and would be extremely powerful.
I have always been irked by Michelin's lack of manifest, measurable, objective, and shareable criteria for normal star-awarding. Still, these are innocuous practices, like an elderly person with dementia playing with tarot cards in a wheelchair on a Sunday afternoon.
On the other hand, being obscure and unaccountable when discussing sustainable practices and presenting someone or something as a role model for sustainability and eco-consciousness can be dangerous because it can be false when not demonstrable - or based on wobbly assumptions.
And, for instance, lying about how good a restaurant's service is or how smooth the creme on our plates had never caused harm—other than the disappointment of those customers who go there and find that the Guide perhaps inflated their expectations a bit with an enthusiastic, too enthusiastic award of stars.
But not being truthful (because of lack of knowledge or malice) about sustainability or social responsibilities is another ballgame. When sustainability and ecological discourses are invoked, we are talking about the livelihood of our planet, the future of your children, and the ecosystem.
A broken mayonnaise or a botched dining service is insignificant compared to pollution, unsustainable working hours, low wages, and the depletion of natural resources.
Nos équipes s’appuient tant sur leur travail de terrain, c’est-à-dire sur les expériences vécues dans les restaurants, que sur des recherches approfondies et des échanges avec les restaurateurs sur leurs pratiques éco-responsables.
(Our teams rely both on their fieldwork, that is, on experiences in restaurants and in-depth research and discussions with restaurateurs on their eco-responsible practices.)
If the above is true, then we - in this time and age where everything can be found out - could get the same informationn, data and insights as the “in-depth researchers” and “fieldwork” of the Michelin equipes, right?
However.
Would you trust a tie-and-suit-wearing middle-aged white man (or woman) from the Global North who works as an executive at a shareholder company whose primary business is producing and selling car tyres as the sustainability ambassador in gastronomy?
No?
Well, neither would I.
What I always found extremely interesting in this greenwashing narrative encompassing Michelin-starred restaurants is their absolute, abyssal silence regarding their everyday sustainability practices. Safe for some nice cutesy pictures with seasonal vegetables and trite sentences on Mother Earth and whatnot, every aspect of their purported sustainability is hidden behind a veil of silence.
There are notable exceptions, but even in those cases, their sustainability discourse is never connected with the star: it is an autonomous discussion, part of a larger narrative where the daily activities of the restaurant are involved.
Let us unpack the Green Star discourse
What are the MICHELIN Inspectors looking for when they award a MICHELIN Green Star?
There is no specific formula for awarding a MICHELIN Green Star, as every restaurant and surrounding region has unique conditions. The Inspectors are looking for those at the top of their game regarding their sustainable practices.
While the British site vaguely mentions “sustainable practices,” other local pages go into more detail.
Ao oferecer uma experiência gastronómica que combina excelência e responsabilidade ecológica, estes estabelecimentos estão a dar forma a um modelo de gastronomia alternativo e particularmente ético.
(These establishments are shaping an alternative and particularly ethical gastronomic model by offering a gastronomic experience that combines excellence and ecological responsibility).
The Portuguese site refers to ethics and alternative models for gastronomy (also without explaining).
si fanno carico delle conseguenze etiche e ambientali della loro attività e che lavorano con produttori e fornitori “sostenibili” per evitare sprechi e ridurre, o meglio ancora azzerare, la plastica e altri materiali non riciclabili dalla loro filiera.
(They are responsible for their activity's ethical and environmental consequences and work with "sustainable" producers and suppliers to avoid waste and reduce or eliminate plastic and other non-recyclable materials from their supply chain).
The Italian site points to the ethical origin of products through their providers and the near-zero waste approach restaurants should take.
Here, not only is evident the impact of the Slow Food Movement and the strength Coldiretti has in Italy regarding producers but also the never-ending saga of waste management (from Napoli burning dioxide in Campi Flrgrei to the rubbish-loaded trains shipped to Germany during the height of the trash crises in Rome).
Einige mit dem Grünen Stern ausgezeichnete Adressen gehen noch weiter und bemühen sich zum Beispiel um einen besonderen Beitrag zur lokalen Wirtschaft oder eine autonome Energieversorgung.
(Some addresses awarded the Green Star go further and, for example, strive to contribute uniquely to the local economy or provide an autonomous energy supply).
Another interesting page is the German one, which points out the need for businesses to contribute uniquely to the local economy and their interest in restaurants with an autonomous energy supply. This is understandable for a country that needs to socially rebuild (a process ongoing since 1989, deepened with the influx of Gastarbeiters) and has succumbed to a deep, energetic crisis since Merkel.
Three examples show how Michelin is also politicised—because food, as I always say, and gastronomy are POLITICAL.
This is why we (consumers, especially gastronomers and gastronomic writers) should be all up in arms with our fellow environmentalists to scrutinise these green awards with less glitter in our eyes.
The Portuguese site gives a push towards proximity practices based on said sustainability - but also to respect the agricultural work and somewhat connected somewhat not, to have a positive impact on local economies:
Abastecer-se o mais próximo possível do restaurante, respeitar a terra e o trabalho dos agricultores e criadores, ter um impacto positivo na economia local.
(Get supplies as close as possible to the restaurant, respect the land and the work of farmers and breeders, and positively impact the local economy).
I suggested you review the restaurants based on the measurable and manifest impact of the restaurant on its neighbourhood: this is rarely done, and it can be a controversial matter because undoubtedly, Michelin dining located in a neighbourhood elevates said place, but can also contribute to gentrification or can be directly or indirectly connected with political parties that are countering sustainability (basically, any right-wing party as of 2025).
I, for once, would never set foot in a restaurant catering for fascists or whose “regulars” are the likes of Musk, or Trump.
In Italy, as I said before, the strength of SlowFood and Coldiretti has a direct impact on fine dining, and the emphasis is heavily focused on the provider’s roles - which is here spoken out and divided into fishmongers, farmers and cattle raisers, with a strong focus on regenerative agriculture:
lavorano direttamente con coltivatori, agricoltori e pescatori, utilizzano pascoli naturali, coltivano piante e allevano animali, utilizzano metodi rigenerativi come gli orti no-dig e la rotazione delle colture intercalari.
(They work directly with growers, farmers, and fishermen, use natural pastures, grow plants and raise animals, and use regenerative methods such as no-dig gardens and catch-crop rotation.)
The UK focus, instead, is much more geared in the discourse towards the footprint of a restaurant, its resource management, and, interestingly, how sustainability is communicated in a dialogue between customers and restaurant staff:
The provenance of the ingredients, the use of seasonal produce, the restaurant’s environmental footprint, food waste systems, general waste disposal and recycling, resource management, and the communication between the team and the guests about the restaurant’s sustainable approach.
In Portugal, where Chef’s prominence in the eco-sustainability discourse is influenced perhaps by the uniqueness of Projeto Matéria, driven by a Chef and a Chef only, they focus on the usual tropes (seasonality, waste management), but interestingly point out the balance and composition of menus. In a country that is heavily geared towards presenting an endless sequence of animal proteins, this says a lot:
atenção dada à origem dos produtos, ao respeito pela sazonalidade, ao equilíbrio e à composição dos menus, ao trabalho de gestão dos resíduos e dos recursos no restaurante, ou ainda à capacidade do chefe de sensibilizar os clientes e a sua equipa para a sua abordagem sustentável.
(Attention is given to the origin of products, respect for seasonality, the balance and composition of menus, waste and resource management work in the restaurant, or even the chef's ability to raise awareness among customers and his team about his sustainable approach).
The Italian Version
A complete guide to the indicators for the award of a green star comes from the Italian page, where they are laid out, in bullet points, some of the criteria. We do not know how these criteria are collected and analysed and what score or weight is attributed to each, but at least it is a start, and we can get an idea:
uso di ingredienti locali e stagionali
use of local and seasonal ingredients
qualità dei prodotti, compresa l’origine biologica, biodinamica ed etica (quality of products, including organic, biodynamic and ethical origin)
basso impatto energetico nell’uso delle risorse (low energy impact in the use of resources)
composizione dei menu (composition of menu)
iniziative per la riduzione dei rifiuti, comprese le politiche zero rifiuti (initiatives for waste reduction, including zero waste policies)
smaltimento, riutilizzo e riciclaggio dei rifiuti (disposal, reuse and recycling of waste)
comunicazione e passione mostrate dallo chef e dal personale sull’argomento (communication and passion shown by the chef and staff on the topic)
initiative creative in campo ambientale (creative initiatives in the environmental field)
collaborazione con la comunità locale (collaboration with the local community)
Something is Missing
As you may have noticed, these objectives are not measurable even when explicitly stated, as on the Italian page.
We also lack parameters, scales, gradients, and definitions of each criterion.
And do not be fooled.
This is by design.
Michelin employs enough engineers to be fooled into developing a fuzzy list of words - even management engineers would know how to do better.
This of the green stars is probably just a marketing gimmick.
If they do not do better, it is because they do not want to—and you should all take note and perhaps relativise Michelin to its true meaning.
The Valencian Example of a Sustainable Guide
The Sustainable Guide of Valencia is “a gastronomic guide that evaluates the environmental sustainability of restaurant activity and the percentage of local raw materials used by restaurants. This editorial project also offers a historical perspective on the historical evolution of the Mediterranean diet, focusing on the region as a crossroads influenced by trade with other territories”.
La unión de los distintos criterios -hasta 15- da lugar al índice de sostenibilidad del restaurante, una puntuación «objetiva», basada en datos verificables, siempre en una escala del 1 al 5 y con la información facilitada por el restaurador.Algunos de estos criterios para evaluar la proximidad y sostenibilidad son (The union of the different criteria - up to 15 - gives rise to the restaurant's sustainability index, an "objective" score, based on verifiable data, always on a scale from 1 to 5 and with the information provided by the restaurateur. Some of these criteria to evaluate proximity and sustainability are):
El porcentaje materia prima de proximidad que utilizan diferenciando la procedente de menos de un kilómetro, de menos de 10 y de menos de 100 (The percentage of local raw materials used, differentiating between those from less than a kilometer, less than 10 and less than 100.)
La proximidad temporal primándose el que los aprovisionamientos sean mayoritariamente de temporada (Temporal proximity, prioritizing supplies being mostly seasonal.)
Si tienen huerto propio o acuerdos estables con agricultores, ganaderos o pescaderos locales (If they have their own garden or stable agreements with local farmers, ranchers or fishmongers).
El uso del agua, si hay pérdidas evitables o aprovechan la de la lluvia (The use of water, if there are avoidable losses or they take advantage of rain)
Qué tipo de energía emplean, penalizando los que usan la fósil y puntuando los que recurren a biomasa o el tratamiento de los deshechos (What type of energy they use, penalizing those who use fossil energy and scoring those who use biomass or waste treatment.)
I like the possibility of verifying the restaurant’s score against a set, stable, and agreed-upon matrix of indicators.
Some of the most interesting indicators are explicitly listed above.
For instance, it makes sense to know whether the restaurant uses fossil fuels—perhaps a criterion the likes of Repsol or even Michelin are not too content with.
I like differentiating and giving meaning to KM 0 and extending the radius to 100 km for product sourcing. A positive outcome of this idea would be that mountain restaurants could not “sustainably” serve seafood in Italy. Too far away, goodbye, tuna tartare.
I LOVE the mention of using and recycling rain and wastewater. Water will be a significant issue in the coming decades around the Mediterranean and an essential aspect of sustainability.
I like the mention of a stable and solid relationship with producers.
This means that the products are not just bought wherever they are cheaper. Still, wherever the restaurant has established a social, economic, and relational network, this means creating the basis for a community—the building block of a social connection.
The Missing Piece
We saw that sustainability is mainly accounted for regarding suppliers, energy use, and zero-waste policies.
Outside of strictly ecological sustainability, some guides add to the sustainability evaluation factors connected to human/cultural sustainability: creating a stable network of suppliers, a community, awareness, and rapport with customers based on sustainability.
As you know me, you may be able to know where I am aiming at.
The last missing piece is human sustainability: health. I am not the first to bring this concept to the discussion table.
The Valencian Community, in 2024, presented the “We're Smart Green Guide”, which recognises restaurants committed to a diet based on fruits and vegetables and a minimal ecological impact, values that València represents in its commitment to local and seasonal products. It says: “With markets full of fresh ingredients and an environment that integrates sea, orchards and rice fields, València embodies the mission of the We're Smart Green Guide to lead the transition towards healthy and sustainable eating”.
It is extraordinary to see a public interest in human health laid out in the open, a push towards healthier eating in the same city with a historically relevant hedonist guide!
Would it Make Sense to Have a Sustainable Award Worldwide?
In short, yes, but it isn't very easy.
Sustainability has a different meaning in the Global North and in the Global South. Moreover, the French-dominated narrative on “what is good service” and “what is fine dining” appears strikingly whitewashed, colonialist, and Westernized if we have to place them in most of the cultural contexts of the Global South.
Not every country wants to become like Dubai, a soulless money-making sandbox.
Some countries have rich, autonomous and elevated gastronomies with associated social, cultural and economic practices that shape their “fine dining” in a way that is too strikingly different from the Michelin standards - which are, by the way, the “Global North/Western” accepted standards in fine dining.
But does it have to be so?
I think not.
Also, out of respect for all different cultures, we should start rethinking what fine dining may mean for traditional Ethiopian gastronomy and restaurants, which cannot adhere to the same parameters invented and deployed in Paris since the Revolution.
Likewise, we must ensure that sustainability is broad, agreed upon and scalable in any community.
But something tells me that the above things need to happen outside the Michelin/50 Best establishment.
Perhaps we need a new gastronomic paradigm—or a revolution—that worked well when fine dining was first socialised, formulated, and described.
You may want to try to find my late site “Michelin Scars”. Thanks, Robert.