Eco-Labels: Making Environmental Purchasing Easier?
Eco-Labels:
Making Environmental Purchasing Easier?
Defining Eco-Labels
An eco-label attempts to provide relevant, accurate, and meaningful information to allow purchasers to incorporate human health and environmental considerations as part of the routine purchasing decision. Ecolabels are an internationally accepted way of differentiating among products. In fact, the United States is one of the few industrialized countries that does not have a government-sponsored, multi-attribute, eco-label program. Our Canadian neighbors and more than 20 other countries as diverse as Germany, Japan, Sweden, Brazil, India, Luxembourg, and Croatia, have a governmentendorsed label they rely upon.
The lack of a single, government-endorsed, multi-attribute eco-label in the United States has led to the rise of numerous competing labeling programs. There are currently more than 40 U.S. eco-labels ( excluding all of the food labels) and the numbers continue to grow as environmental and consumer groups, individual companies, and trade associations create their own. Some of the labels are almost meaningless, such as the “eco-labels” developed by a single company or those some trade associations grant to all of their members. As a result, purchasers must first determine which labels provide accurate, credible, and useful information before using them to help make purchasing decisions.
By Scott Case
Any purchaser who has ever been asked to buy less harmful or more environmentally preferable products has faced the same questions and concerns — I’m not an environmental expert, how do I identify the safer alternatives? Which of the human health or environmental factors is really most important? Can’t someone just tell me which products are the green ones?
Luckily, there are a variety of different environmental labeling programs trying to resolve these challenges for purchasers. The eco-labels can make it easier to identify the less harmful and more environmentally preferable alternatives. Some of them even consider broader issues like whether the workers are fairly compensated or whether the rights of indigenous people are being protected. It is important to note, however, that not all eco-labels are created equal. There are important differences between them. They have different focus areas. They are developed by different organizations for different purposes. Some are significantly more credible and meaningful; others are virtually meaningless. The challenge for purchasers is to be able to quickly separate the more credible labels from the less credible ones and to find successful ways of using them to buy safer products while keeping prices affordable.
Green Government
Federal Executive Order 13101, Greening the Government Through Waste Prevention, Recycling, and Federal Acquisition, encourages agencies to use the “technical expertise of non-governmental entities such as labeling, certification, or standardsdeveloping organizations.”
Classifying Eco-Labels
There are a variety of different types of eco-labels purchasers will encounter. The following classification system expands upon the system developed by the International Organization for Standardization (ISO):
“Warning”
labels
identify
specific
concerns
associated
with
a
product.
California’s
Proposition
65
list,
for
example,
designates
more
than
700
different
chemicals
as
known
human
health
hazards.
Products
sold
in
California
containing
any
of
the
chemicals
must
be
clearly
labeled.
Purchasers
can
then
choose
to
avoid
products
carrying
the
warning
labels.
“Seal
of
Approval”
labels
are
awarded
to
products
that
meet
a
broad
set
of
criteria
determined
by
the
standard-setting
organization.
The
criteria
are
selected
based
on
an
independent
evaluation
of
the
human
health
and
environmental
impact
occurring
throughout
the
manufacture,
use,
and
ultimate
disposal
of
a
commodity.
The more credible seals, such as those developed by Green Seal, the Canadian Environmental Choice program, and a few others are considered leadership standards. They are designed so that only the top 15 to 20 percent of products are capable of meeting their more stringent criteria.
Other seals, typically those developed by or on behalf of industry trade associations, identify minimally accepted standards and can generally be met by most products within the industry.
“Single
Attribute”
labels
recognize
products
that
exceed
a
selected
threshold
for
a
single
environmental
attribute.
The
U.S.
government’s
Energy
Star
program,
for
example,
allows
companies
to
identify
products
meeting
its
en-
ergy-efficiency specifications to promote their products with the Energy Star label. Scientific Certification Systems (SCS) awards a variety of single attribute labels recognizing attributes like recycled-content or indoor air quality. These labels are extremely valuable for verifying a single attribute, but they are less useful for those organizations trying to balance multiple human health and environmental considerations.
“Report
Card”
labels
resemble
the
nutrition
labels
that
appear
on
packaged
food.
They
provide
information
on
attributes
selected
by
the
labeling
organization.
This
type
of
label
requires
the
purchaser
to
determine
which
human
health
and
environmental
attributes
are
most
relevant
before
deciding
which
products
are
more
preferable.
SCS
provides
this
type
of
label
for
electricity
generation
facilities.
“Multi-tier”
labels
reward
products
with
additional
recognition
for
achieving
higher
levels
of
environmental
performance.
The
U.S.
Green
Building
Council’s
Leadership
in
Energy
and
Environmental
Design
(LEED)
standard,
for
example,
includes
four
categories:
certified,
silver,
gold,
and
platinum.
Some
advocates
prefer
the
multi-tier
approach
to
the
pass/fail
approach
of
the
seal
of
approval
and
single
attribute
programs
because
they
think
it
provides
useful
differentiation
among
the
certified
products.
It is important to note, however, that a multi-tier approach does not necessarily mean a label is more meaningful. Some multi-tier labeling programs are significantly weaker than their pass/fail counterparts so even products earning the highest possible rating might fail to meet the pass/fail standards.
Purchasers must first determine which labels provide accurate, credible, and useful information before using them to help make purchasing decisions.
Comparing Eco-Labels: All Labels Are Not Created Equal
There are three critical components of any labeling program—the validity of the standard on which the label is based, the process used to set the standard, and the verification processes used to demonstrate if a product meets the standard. Within each of the three components, there is a spectrum of possible strategies ranging from the most to the least desirable.
Based on recommendations by the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA), Consumer’s Union (publisher of
Consumer
Reports), and members of the Global Ecolabelling Network ( GEN), purchasers can use the following guidelines to identify the most credible labels.
Validity of the Standard
Standards
should
have
a
clear
and
consistent
meaning.
The
meaning
of
the
label
should
not
change
based
on
who
is
certifying
a
product
or
which
manufacturer’s
product
is
being
certified.
Standards
also
should
be
very
clear
about
what
aspects
of
a
product’s
environmental
performance
they
cover.
In
reviewing
labels
for
office
fax
machines,
for
example,
the
Energy
Star
label
only
ensures
the
product
meets
specific
energyefficiency
performance
levels.
The
Green
Guard
label
only
addresses
indoor
air
quality
issues.
The
Environmental
Choice
label
covers
both
energy-efficiency
and
air
quality
concerns
in
addition
to
other
environmental
considerations
such
as
whether
the
fax
machines
minimize
noise
and
can
accept
remanufactured
toner
cartridges.
The
environmental
information
should
be
meaningful
and
verifiable.
It
is
important
to
know
exactly what a label means. Vague terms like ” environ-mentally friendly” are insufficient because different organizations could interpret the term differently. The standard should include explicit information defining what ingredients and practices are acceptable or prohibited or which testing protocols are used to make such determinations. Comparing several eco-labels to determine if they are addressing similar concerns is one way of ensuring the information is meaningful. GEN members often have agreements among themselves to recognize the validity of each others standards, which provides further evidence of their validity.
The
standard
guidelines
and
resulting
standard
must
not
conflict
with
the
Federal
Trade
Commission’s
(FTC)
Guides
for
the
Use
of
Environmental
Marketing
Claims
.
Standard-Setting Process
There
should
be
no
conflict
of
interest
for
the
standard
setting
organization.
This
precludes
an
individual
company
from
developing
standards
for
products
it
manufactures
or
sells
and
precludes
a
trade
association
from
developing
standards
for
products
its
members
manufacture
or
sell.
Multi-attribute
standards
should
be
based
on
human
health
and
environmental
considerations
throughout
the
life
cycle
of
the
product
from
raw
material
extraction,
manufacture,
use,
and
ultimate
disposal
of
the
product.
The
life
cycle
stages
considered
and
covered
by
the
standard
should
be
explicitly
stated.
Written
opinions
of
key
stakeholders
from
companies
throughout
the
industry,
environmental
and
consumer
safety
organizations,
end
users,
and
other
interested
parties,
including members of the public, should be actively solicited throughout the development process.
Standards
should
be
developed
in
a
transparent
process
that
clearly
identifies
the
funding
sources
for
the
standard
setting
organization.
It
should
also
identify
the
name
and
professional
affiliations
of
everyone
involved
in
preparing,
reviewing,
commenting
upon,
and
finalizing
the
standard.
All
comments
provided
throughout
the
standard
development
process
should
be
available
to
the
public
and
clearly
identify
the
commentator
and
document
the
standard
setting
organization’s
response
to
the
comments.
Standards
should
be
reviewed
and
updated
on
a
regular
basis.
Verification Process
A variety of protocols are available to verify that a product meets a standard. Some are more rigorous (and more expensive), but provide a greater degree of assurance. The protocols listed below are presented in ascending order from least to most preferable.
Self
certification:
Individual
companies
certify
their
products
meet
the
environmental
standard.
Self
certification
with
random
audits:
Individual
companies
certify
their
products,
but
the
standard
setting
organization
conducts
random
audits
to
ensure
compliance.
Independent
third-party
certification:
An
independent
organization
verifies
the
products
meet
the
standard
based
on
information
provided
by
the
manufacturer.
Independent
third-party
certification
with
on-site
audits:
An
independent
organization
verifies
the
products
meet
the
standards
based
on
information
provided
by
the
manufacturer
and
after
an
on-site
visit
to
verify
the
accuracy
of
the
information
provided
by
the
manufacturer.
It is important to note that a stringent verification process is relatively meaningless if the standard against which a commodity is being measured is not meaningful.
Using Eco-Labels
Purchasers are using eco-labels in several ways to reduce the adverse human health and environmental impact of their purchasing decisions.
Researching Human Health and Environmental Considerations
Reviewing the issues addressed by several eco-labels is a very effective way of quickly determining which considerations are most important for an upcoming purchase. It is the first place most purchasers begin. Purchasers then use the information from a variety of sources to prepare purchasing specifications or develop request for proposal (RFP) criteria. EPA, GEN, and Consumer’s Union each make it easy to quickly locate many of the relevant eco-labels for any commodity.
Developing Purchasing Specifications
Purchasers are also increasingly comfortable using a single, credible eco-label as the basis for a purchasing specification. While neither Massachusetts nor Santa Monica, California required Green Seal certification for the safer cleaning products they buy, their product requirements were built from Green Seal’s institutional cleaning product standard after carefully reviewing all of the other relevant labels.
Label Comparison
Consumer’s Union, publisher of
Consumer
Reports, compares the value of various eco-labels on its www.eco-labels.org Web site.
Editor’s Note: The Green Purchaser is a regular feature tracking the growing sustainable purchasing movement—the effort to buy less polluting products from less polluting companies. Scot Case is the Director of Procurement Strategies at the Center for a New American Dream where he helps institutional purchasers buy less polluting products from less polluting companies. Visit: www.newdream.org/procure or e-mail Case at [email protected].
Both RFPs clearly stated that Green Seal certified products automatically meet their environmental requirements. Many of other purchasers also use Green Seal standards for paint, cleaning products, or other products, including Chicago, IL; Sarasota County, FL; Multnomah County, OR; Portland, OR; Seattle, WA; the Aberdeen Proving Ground in Maryland; EPA headquarters; the U.S. Department of Interior and dozens of others.
Green Seal is not the only certification program frequently incorporated into purchasing specifications. Portland, Santa Monica, Seattle, and others include references to Forest Stewardship Council (FSC) certified wood and wood products. Santa Monica, Massachusetts, and the Western States Contracting Alliance (WSCA) mention TCO certification in their RFPs for computer equipment. Sarasota County references the Chlorine Free Products Association’s (CFPA) processed chlorine free label. Public-and private-sector purchasers throughout Canada reference the Environmental Choice program.
Rewarding Certified Products
While some purchasers remain reluctant to require products to be certified, government purchasers are beginning to reward certified products during product evaluation because it makes it easier to determine which products meet the human health and environmental requirements. The Canadian government, for example, provides additional consideration to those products certified by the Environmental Choice program when evaluating bids for office electronic equipment.
Cleaning product suppliers in Ventura County, CA, can avoid a lengthy and time consuming verification process if its products are already Green Seal certified.
Requiring Certified Products
Purchasers have traditionally avoided requiring products to be certified because they fear it will limit competition thereby increasing costs. As markets for certified
products mature, this becomes less of an issue because sufficient competition is available within the pool of certified products. Almost everyone, for example, requires purchases of Energy Star certified products because the certified products are so widely available. The Commonwealth of Pennsylvania determined this was also the case with cleaning products. As part of a recent solicitation, Pennsylvania required all products to be Green Seal certified or to demonstrate compliance with the Green Seal institutional cleaning product standard.
Growing numbers of purchasers are requiring all new construction projects to be LEED certified or to demonstrate compliance with the standard, including Portland, Sarasota County, EPA, and others. EPA required Green-e certification when it purchased renewable energy for several of its laboratory facilities. Bidders were required to be certified or to become Green-e certified within 45 days of contract award. Similarly, almost a dozen purchasers in Canada, including the Canadian government, require generating facilities to be certified by the Environmental Choice program before they will buy “green” electricity.
Future of Eco-Labels
Given the growing numbers of purchasing officials seeking safer products, eco-labels will remain an important tool for purchasers. Until the United States joins the rest of the world in developing or endorsing a single, multi-attribute, eco-label, purchasers will need to remain familiar with the available labels. It is also important to note, however, that given the increasingly global economy, many products sold overseas might already meet foreign eco-certification requirements because it is essential for overseas sales. As a result, it never hurts to ask about eco-certification or to use eco-labels to develop human health and environmental requirements. You might be surprised to discover that some products you buy are already certified. You won’t know unless you ask.
PRO PATHWAYS
Visit the following organizations referenced in the article: —Chlorine Free Products Association: www.chlorinefree products.org.
—Consumer’s Union: www.eco-labels.org.
—Energy Star: www.energy star.gov/purchasing.
—Environmental Choice: www.environmentalchoice.ca.
—EPA Environmentally Preferable Purchasing Program: www.epa.gov/oppt/epp.
EPA Standards and Label Database: http://yosemite1. epa.gov/oppt/eppstand2.nsf.
—Federal Trade Commission: www.ftc.gov/bcp/grnrule/ guides980427.htm.
—Forest Stewardship Council: www.fsc.org.
—Global Ecolabelling Network: www.gen.gr.jp.
—Green-e: www.green-e.org. —Green Guard: www.greenguard.org.
—Green Seal: www.greenseal.org.
International Organization for Standardization: www.iso.org.
—U.S. Green Building Council’s Leadership in Energy and Environmental design (LEED): www.usgbc.org/leed.
—Scientific Certification Systems: www.scscertified.com.
—TCO: www.tco development.com.
