Environmental Labels: Curse or Blessing?

The task of environmental labels on packaging is to indicate that products within a specific group comply with specified environmental compatibility requirements. Often, however, their use results in product assessment – all the way down to market distortions. In a Position Paper on Eco-Labels Plastics Europe presents its viewpoint.



DIN standard EN ISO 14024 “Environmental Labels and Declarations – Environmental Label Type I – Principles and Processes” contains provisions for eco-labelling systems. Be it the “Blue Angel” in Germany, the “Nordic Swan” in Scandinavia, the “EU Eco-Label” or the Japanese “Ecomark”, all of these eco-labels are voluntary labels that map a clearly defined market. All attempts made to harmonise eco-labels have failed so far. The principal feature of this labelling is that the criteria for issuing a label and the decision on whether a specific product can bear a label are not laid down or taken by the manufacturers or other stakeholders themselves but by a neutral body. The assessment of whether a specific product category qualifies for a label, what environmental impacts are of relevance for issuing the label and what performance criteria need to be fulfilled in the various environmental segments is subject to a formalised process.

Manufacturers voice Criticism

Despite claims that criteria should be based on scientific findings a precautionary element is often involved, says Dr. Ingo Sartorius, Manager for Plastics and the Environment in the plastics manufacturers’ association Plastics Europe Deutschland e.V. Very often only a potential hazard assumption is made rather than a real risk assessment, the lifecycle perspective or the useful service life is not taken into consideration or an “excessive” proportion of recyclates is required. For this Plastics Europe has presented its Position Paper on Eco-Labels.

Theory and Practice

The standards ISO 14000 et seq. and especially ISO 14020 et seq. describe key rules for using product-related environmental information. The choice of a standard depends on the given products as well as on the demands made of a company. The principles of the ISO 14020 standards include correct data, the avoidance of barriers to innovation and trade, verifiable methods, product lifecycle considerations, moderation, open-end consultations as well as information for buyers. Plastics Europe criticises the actual approach per se. They demand that scientifically based risk assessments should form the basis for decisions on the choice of materials and that risk-management decisions should consider the actual type of usage and daily intake. They criticise the fact that decisions are too often taken solely on the basis of a theoretical hazard potential. In eco-marketing preference is often given to image and emotions rather than facts and scientific findings, and alternatives are too often presented as superior – without considering value for money aspects or without exact knowledge of toxicology and ecology.

Plastics Products at a Disadvantage?

The Association sees a clear disadvantage here for plastics products and explains that potential risks have now been identified and minimised by suitable measures. Furthermore, it feels that a risk for health or the environment cannot be infered solely from the presence of a toxic substance. Furthermore, it is said that plastics products are governed by clear legal provisions on product safety, consumer protection and the Chemicals Act.
Plastics Europe takes a clear position on environmental labelling according to which plastics products are sustainable – indeed it is only only the term “eco” that is limiting. Furthermore, the assessment must also take into consideration primary product functions and issuance principles and criteria must be based on facts. Additionally, the Association calls for a product lifecycle view as well as unambiguous and unmistakeable communication and adds that eco-labels are not the sole motivation in buying decisions.

Assessment of Sustainability

To sum up it can be said that – despite, or probably because of, the rising number of labels and product hallmarks – consumers find it difficult to decide whether products sold at superstores, DIY stores or drugstores are sustainable. Does such a thing as a TRULY sustainable product exist at all? Probably not. Sustainability is a very complex term covering a wide variety of ecological and social aspects. Most products move along a globally networked value chain in their lifecycle. Which makes it a challenge to follow the ecological and social conditions associated with the production, use and disposal of products. But exactly this lifecycle-oriented approach is probably the real key to a comprehensive assessment of product sustainability. On the other hand, consumers want and need simple and, above all, unambiguous criteria at the PoS for their purchasing decisions. This “balancing act” between both keeping labelling simple and providing guidance in the eco-label jungle and the question as to whether labelling is a curse or a blessing for companies will be here to stay for quite some time.