What was proposed by the Commission?
Aimed at thwarting greenwashing, the proposals have been made in attempt to prevent companies from making unsubstantiated environmental claims. And with over 200 environmental labels in circulation in the EU – half of which are reportedly vague, misleading, or unfounded – the proposal has been eagerly anticipated by green campaigners across the Union. They hope the new rules would help drive the transition to a just, sustainable, circular economy.
The Directive would apply to voluntary environmental claims made by traders about products or traders in business-to-consumer commercial practices, including agriculture products. The Directive would set minimum requirements on the substantiation and communication of green claims. Put simply, any environmental labels on a product would have to be justified.
Methodology
A leaked version of the proposal showed that the Commission originally planned to use the Product Environment Footprint (PEF) or Organisational Environment Footprint (OEF) to substantiate green claims – both of which are lifecycle assessments.
However, the Commission has not prescribed a single method of calculation, citing that the PEF/OEF methods do not consider all potential impacts on the environment. For example, the method does not cover farm level biodiversity or farming practice. Rather than stipulating a single methodology, the Directive allows flexibility in methodology but defines minimum criteria for substantiating a claim. This includes:
- Inclusion of accurate primary, company specific data where possible. Where this is not available, secondary information should be permitted, so long as it shows high a high level of quality and accuracy.
- any environmental claim must be based on a widely recognised, scientific evidence and based on state-of-the-art technology.
Labelling schemes
Before communicating a green claim on a label, companies would have to have a green claim independently verified. In addition, information must also be readily available for consumers.
Under the proposal, the Commission aims to clamp down on new labelling schemes. New public schemes will not be permitted unless developed at an EU level. If a Member State considers that a new public labelling scheme is required, it can ask the EU to develop it. Private schemes could be permitted but only if added value can be demonstrated. The scheme would have to be validated by the Commission.
Agri-food products
Any agri-food product sold in the European Union with a voluntary environmental label would have to comply with the Directive. The Directive excludes claims that are already covered by exisiting EU rules, such as the EU Ecolabel, and therefore does not apply to environmental claims on organically certified products.
The role of Member States
The Commission has delegated powers to Member States to monitor and enforce the Directive. Member States would have to designate a competent authority. Competent authorities would be required to perform regular checks on claims and labelling schemes, alongside monitoring the risks of infringement, and taking the necessary steps such as inspections and hearings.
In the case of infringements, Member States would define penalties based on the nature, gravity, extent and duration of the infringement. Penalties should be effective and proportionate and could include confiscation of revenues, fines or temporary exclusion from access to public. In any case, penalties would have to effectively dissuade traders from non-compliance with requirements of the Directive.
Third countries
Any product in the European Union with an environmental claim would have to comply with the Directive, and any third country labelling scheme would have to be approved by the Commission. Therefore, if a UK producer wishes to sell their product in the EU with an environmental claim, the Commission would be required to approve the labelling scheme.