The European Commission unveiled on Wednesday 22 March its proposed regulatory framework to combat misleading environmental claims and greenwashing by setting minimum requirements and common criteria for the substantiation and communication of ‘green’ claims by companies.
The long-awaited proposal for a Directive on the substantiation and communication of green claims - a key element of the ‘European Green Deal’ - differs significantly from the version leaked in January (see EUROPE 13104/1).
Indeed, the method of calculating the environmental footprint of the product (EFP) and organisations is no longer at the heart of the proposal. It is only one of the methods that would be allowed, provided that the claims used by companies as a selling point for their products or services are third party verified and scientifically proven.
“We want consumers to get reliable, consistent and verifiable information. We want more transparent and easy-to-understand environmental labels and we want greater legal certainty for businesses by ensuring a level playing field in the internal market, which will strengthen the competitiveness of economic operators trying to improve their environmental sustainability”, summarised Commissioner for Environment Virginijus Sinkevičius at a press conference.
The proposed rules will be voluntary, as they will only apply to companies that wish to use environmental claims. And if the harmonised EFP method no longer holds such a high priority, “it is because we do not want to prescribe a method. We have chosen a broader approach, which takes into account all kinds of specifications that are found in the proposed Ecodesign for Sustainable Products Regulation” of March 2022, the Commissioner justified.
Scope. The proposed framework is intended to serve as a safety net for all sectors where environmental claims or labels are not regulated at EU level, and not to change existing or future sectoral rules.
It covers all voluntary claims about the environmental impacts, aspects or performance of a product, service or the trader itself. The proposal targets explicit claims, such as ‘T-shirt made from recycled plastic bottles’, ‘CO2 offset delivery’, ‘packaging made from 30% recycled plastic’ or ‘ocean-friendly sunscreen’.
This excludes claims covered by existing EU rules, such as the EU Ecolabel, the organic food logo or the Eco-Management and Audit Scheme (EMAS), the reliability of which is already guaranteed by legislation. Carbon neutrality claims would not be banned, but the Commission wants companies to distinguish between their own efforts to reduce emissions and the use of carbon offset schemes, such as tree planting.
A level playing field. Reflecting the importance the Commission attaches to creating a level playing field in the Single Market, the proposal is based on Article 114 (Internal Market). For the Commissioner, it is about “protecting businesses and consumers against greenwashing”.
Reliable, comparable and verifiable information for consumers. According to the proposal, when companies choose to use a green claim for their products or services, they will have to comply with minimum requirements on how they justify and communicate these claims. Before a green claim is communicated to consumers, it will have to be independently verified and scientifically proven.
National competent authorities would be required to regularly monitor environmental claims, make their findings public and impose fines on companies that mislead consumers.
Put a stop to the proliferation of labels. The future Directive also aims to tackle the proliferation of labels and new public and private environmental labels.
There are currently 230 labels on the market, half of which are not scientifically substantiated. “Consumers are confused. This proliferation prevents cross-border trade and fragments the market”, Mr Sinkevičius stressed. Only those who respect the rules will remain.
The new private systems that companies wish to develop will have to have a greater environmental ambition and obtain prior approval to be authorised.
Penalties. It will be up to the Member States to define the rules for imposing dissuasive sanctions on offenders.
Satisfaction in the EPP Group in Parliament. MEP Peter Liese (EPP, German) welcomed the proposal. “This will benefit those companies that are actually moving in the right direction. Generally, I am very happy that the proposal is not over-bureaucratic. It would not be a good idea if a small or medium sized company had to hire consultants or pay high amounts of money to lawyers just to clarify that they do something that is positive, but quite obvious”, he said.
The European Consumers’ Organisation (BEUC) called for a ban on carbon neutrality claims for foods (see EUROPE 13138/17). Nevertheless, BEUC finds the proposal encouraging. “Preventing the problem instead of correcting it once the harm is done is an innovative move which will benefit consumers, who want to act sustainably and need reliable information to do so”, said BEUC Director General Monique Goyens. Stressing the importance of enforcement, she welcomed “that consumer organisations will be able to bring collective complaints to court”.
The environmental NGO ECOS, for its part, deplored the fact that consumer information had been watered down. Because it “fails to impose an EU-wide method to calculate the environmental impacts behind the omnipresent green claims on products”, the proposal “opens the way for companies to cherry pick methodologies that show the most ‘promising’ marketing results. This means that environmental claims will simply not be comparable”, the NGO said.
The proposal: https://aeur.eu/f/5xw (Original version in French by Aminata Niang)