Effectively avoiding greenwashing – more transparency in environmental claims
Eco-labels on products – valid environmental claims or greenwashing?
©plainpicture/Jag Images
Consumers are faced with the challenge of correctly interpreting a plethora of environmental claims made on products and services. While many consumers state that environmental friendliness is an important criterion in their purchasing decisions, there is often a lack of reliable and verifiable information. A new study conducted by Oeko-Institut on behalf of the German Environment Agency shows how transparency and comparability can be enhanced by analysing the tension between comprehensible environmental claims and greenwashing. This includes the disclosure of environmental information, stricter testing and clear labels for consumers.
Information overload makes sustainable purchasing decisions more difficult
Companies have various options for making environmental claims – from becoming independently certified to making voluntary commitments. While ecolabels such as the Blue Angel or the EU Ecolabel are based on standardised test procedures and enjoy a high level of trust, self-assigned labels or general terms such as ‘climate-neutral’ or ‘sustainable’ are often not clearly defined or scientifically substantiated. In view of the large number of different environmental claims, consumers find it difficult to distinguish between credible and less reliable statements.
More clarity and orientation thanks to new EU directives
The legal framework for environmental claims is currently being tightened at European level to ensure clarity and transparency. The implementation of the ‘Empowering Consumers for the Green Transition (EmpCo) Directive’ and the ‘Green Claims Directive’ introduces clearer and binding requirements for all market participants as regards substantiating and communicating voluntary environmental claims. In future, companies will have to provide robust evidence for their environmental claims, which in turn must be based on scientifically sound methods and verifiable data.
The new regulation focuses on general and unproven terms such as ‘climate-neutral’ or ‘environmentally friendly’. With the entry into force of the EmpCo Directive, sweeping or unfounded environmental claims like ‘100% sustainable’ are expressly prohibited. In the future, companies will only be allowed to make environmental claims if they can be substantiated by verifiable information and their relevance can be justified. Above all, self-declared environmental claims will be much more strictly regulated and only certification based on recognised and transparent standards will be permitted.
Recommendations: more transparency and verifiable information
The study by Oeko-Institut formulates specific recommendations to better protect consumers and provide companies with a clear framework for credible environmental claims:
- Clear definitions and a scientific basis: Environmental claims for products and services should be based on clear, scientifically sound criteria.
- Clear requirements for substantiating and verifying environmental claims: Companies should demonstrate that the environmental claims they make are relevant in the context of the entire life cycle of the products and provide independent evidence for their environmental promises. A regular review of the claims by external bodies is particularly important.
- Consumer-friendly labelling: Uniform, comprehensible and adequately substantiated environmental labels can help to provide guidance. In particular, state-approved ecolabels with independent certification should be promoted and protected more strongly.
- Requirements for voluntary environmental claims: Companies that decide to make environmental claims on a voluntary basis must do so based on standardised requirements and minimum criteria. Misleading advertising messages resulting from selective or incomplete information must be avoided.
‘The further development of the regulatory framework for substantiating and communicating environmental claims also offers opportunities for companies,’ says Antony. ‘Concrete and specific guidelines on the minimum requirements can help companies to better differentiate valid environmental claims from unfair claims made by other market participants.’
