As sustainability claims face increasing scrutiny, new EU regulations aim to prevent misleading labels. Suston Magazine explores the implications of the Green Claims Directive, showcasing perspectives from experts and industry leaders navigating the changing landscape.

The EU’s Green Claims Directive: Timeline and compliance

While the timeline is not set in stone, a final agreement on the EU’s Green Claims Directive is expected by spring 2025. Following this, member states will have one and a half years to implement these laws nationally. Then companies will have to comply with the requirements defined by the Green Claims Directive by early 2028. Even so, one of the largest outdoor retailers in the Netherlands, Bever, chose to withdraw its sustainability label “Our Planet” in 2024 – just three years after its launch.

Bever is part of the Yonderland group, with large retailers in six markets in Western Europe. Melanie Grünwald, Head of Sustainability at Yonderland, explains that “Our Planet” was grounded in 23 criteria spanning the entire product value chain, addressing both environmental and social factors.

In late 2022, however, the Dutch Authority for Consumers and Markets (ACM) targeted two major players, Décathlon and H&M, over misleading sustainability claims. ACM’s investigation found that Décathlon’s “Ecodesign” and H&M’s “Conscious” labels lacked substantiated claims, prompting both companies to discontinue these labels and agree to donations of €500,000 and €400,000 respectively to sustainability causes.

“The Netherlands is one of the forerunners in the EU. Following the scrutiny of Décathlon and H&M’s labels, we engaged in extensive discussions with our legal advisors. Although ‘Our Planet’ was intended as an informative label – not a qualitative or rating label – our advisors recommended discontinuing it across all markets over the next years,” says Melanie Grünwald.

Tools for internal sustainability management

Though the EU’s Green Claims Directive is still under discussion, the Empowering Consumers laws took effect in 2023, with full implementation by member states targeted for 2026. This legislation also encompasses regulations around green claims. Melanie Grünwald describes this as a “patchwork,” with countries across Europe and North America advancing at varied speeds and with differing ambitions and information requirements. Still, one thing is clear:

“Even relative claims are impossible to use. We cannot claim one product is more sustainable than another without a comprehensive life cycle analysis of all similar products on the market, which is currently not feasible,” says Melanie Grünwald.

She acknowledges the need for stringent standards but notes the challenges they pose for the industry’s timeline.

“The brands we work with often plan two seasons ahead. When authorities demand a higher level of granularity in information, adapting takes time and retailers are at the mercy of their brands’ progress.”

Despite the label’s consumer-facing withdrawal, “Our Planet” remains highly valuable internally for Yonderland as a tool when building the retailers’ product ranges, explains Melanie Grünwald. She highlights RAB’s “Material Facts” for information sharing at the product level as aligned with the coming legislation and says that Yonderland is working in similar directions.

“We continue to publish the information datapoints regarding the products, which are collected as part of the Our Planet system.”

Vaude’s journey toward an accredited standard

One of Germany’s sustainability pioneers, Vaude, has so far chosen another path: To develop its Green Shape label into an accredited standard that meets the EU directives around empowering consumers.

But at first glance, it might seem like Vaude’s Green Shape product label is not particularly aligned with this directive. In the company’s CSR report, Green Shape is described with some of the terminology that consumer authorities are targeting. The label is said to be used for “eco products” that are “environmentally friendly.” Also, the word “Green” is not a favorite among these authorities.

However, many insiders regard the Green Shape environmental standard as one of the most detailed within the outdoor industry. The first version was launched already in 2010, and the third version is now used by Vaude following revisions by stakeholders such as Greenpeace. Today, Vaude uses 45 criteria to evaluate their products, with an overarching life cycle perspective.

Vaude’s goal is now to reach an external approval of the standard by the German Accreditation Body (DAkks). In the CSR report, Vaude admits: “This is a very complex administrative process that requires a lot of preparatory work.” As one step on this journey, the company established a Green Shape Advisory Board in 2022, explains Hilke Patzwall, Senior Manager CSR at Vaude.

“Vaude is in the process of making the Green Shape Standard compliant with the Empowering Consumers Directive. This involves making the standard independent from Vaude as program owner.”

No matter how this will evolve, Hilke Patzwall agrees with Melanie Grünwald on the benefits of these kinds of systems as strategic sustainability tools within the company.

“The Green Shape serves as a guidance for our product development. We also use the criteria for sourcing, both when it comes to suppliers and materials,” says Hilke Patzwall.

Norway’s proactive approach to greenwashing

Another country that has taken a strong stance against misleading “eco labels,” despite not being a member of the EU, is Norway. In 2022, the Norwegian Consumer Authority (NCA) ruled that the Norwegian brand Norrøna’s product claims based on Higg MSI data were misleading to consumers and prohibited its use. Norrøna was instructed to revise or remove the relevant marketing materials. H&M’s sustainability labeling faced similar criticism.

According to Tonje Drevland, Assistant Director at the NCA, the focus on the textile industry is no coincidence:

“People encounter extensive marketing from the textile industry in their daily lives. This sector has a significant impact on public trust in green claims, both positively and negatively,” Tonje Drevland explains.

Even well-designed systems for eco-labeling face criticism, often due to how claims are communicated – or rather, how the full picture is not communicated.

“A common mistake is referring to products as ‘more sustainable’ when they still have a negative environmental impact. But no one wants a label that says, ‘This product is slightly less harmful to the environment,’” Tonje Drevland notes.

She emphasizes the importance of companies telling the whole story about their impacts, including their challenges and limitations.

“Companies need to be humbler and more transparent. What are the difficulties and challenges? By doing so, they not only comply with legal intentions but also build customer trust.”

Looking ahead, Tonje Drevland highlights upcoming requirements for third-party certifications and scientifically backed methods and arguments.

“Authorities aren’t enforcing these measures just to be difficult – we aim to restore public trust,” Tonje Drevland concludes.

Navigating the EU’s Directives: Insights from Brussels

Pascale Moreau, founder of Ohana Public Affairs in Brussels, has become a familiar face at outdoor industry gatherings across Europe. Ohana Public Affairs closely monitors the entire EU Green Deal legislative package, helping to interpret its often-complex processes for the industry. Questions about environmental claims at the product level have been frequent in recent years, Pascale Moreau explains.

“Today, many wonder whether even well-established material certifications like GOTS, RWS, and RDS are truly ‘future-proof.’ I think we’ll only have the answers once the EU’s Green Claims Directive is implemented in 2028. But the organizations behind the certifications are doing their best to prepare despite the uncertainty,” says Pascale Moreau.

Like Tonje Drevland, Pascale Moreau notes that many textile companies still hold a vague, and at times naive, understanding of how sustainability should be communicated at the product level.

“Terms like ‘green’ and ‘eco’ frequently appear in marketing, even though such claims are not permitted,” Pascale Moreau observes.

She is skeptical about individual companies developing standards that will satisfy EU regulators. Similarly, she doubts whether the textile or outdoor industries can establish their own unified standard.

“In theory, it’s possible, but in practice, it would be a massive undertaking requiring significant collaboration,” Pascale Moreau explains.

She mentions a frequently overlooked point: It is possible to influence policymakers in Brussels. According to Moreau, most outdoor companies have been quiet in this area. By contrast, FESI, the Federation of the European Sporting Goods Industry, has been very active in advocacy efforts.

“Outdoor is a relatively small industry with limited resources. However, as they fall under FESI’s umbrella, many outdoor companies could benefit from being more active within FESI and/or the European Outdoor Group, seeking information, and exploring opportunities to make their voices heard,” Pascale Moreau says.

“Many policymakers and legislators genuinely want to hear from the businesses impacted.”

 

Illustration: Susan Larsen