This is my article written for The Guardian. In it I explain that a ‘green’ label is often an inaccurate guide to the environmental impact of a product

The rise in ‘greenwash’, the practice of making misleading or unsubstantiated claims about the environmental benefits of a product, service or company, is damaging the environment and industry.

The problem is made worse by the variations of green labels and claims. Some ‘green’ claims are clear and accurate, but others such as ‘low carbon’, ‘natural’ and ‘recyclable’ are designed to create a good impression without explaining the environmental benefit in enough detail.

Labels are popular as they provide quick assurance on a product’s sustainability credentials; after all, few consumers have the time to study every purchase they make. But the methods of obtaining these labels are often unreliable, involving schemes that aim of attract wide participation (and payment) from manufacturers and therefore set a low bar for qualification. Instead of differentiating between good and bad products, most labels tend to lump them into one category. From all the ‘A’ rated washing machines available, which is the best?

There is also duplication among labels, confusing customers and forcing manufacturers to certify the same product several times. Several certifications lack independent validation or may even be administered by the manufacturers themselves.

In order to make genuine progress towards sustainable manufacturing and wipe out greenwash, ‘labelling’ schemes must use transparent criteria and be based on scientific facts. Indeed, this seems to be the way things are going, with some industries already disclosing the environmental impacts of their products, either in full or at least emphasising the most important. For example, you wouldn’t expect a car manufacturer to sell you a ‘carbon neutral’ or ‘recyclable’ car, but it is mandatory for them to display grams of CO2 emissions per kilometre in car advertisements. Also, a website set up by the EU now publishes power consumption data for all electronic equipment sold in Europe.

Companies and regulators now recognise that the biggest environmental impacts are outside of the manufacturers’ control and usually occur in the supply of raw materials or when the product is being used. Therefore, basing a judgement solely on manufacturing impacts can be misleading. By using a life cycle assessment (LCA) you can identify all the significant environmental impacts of with the product, including those on water, air and land, throughout its manufacture, use and disposal.

The accepted method is defined by the International Standards Organisation (ISO14040 and ISO14044), and conducting an LCA can show a manufacturer which areas of production need the most attention to reduce the environmental impact. For example, for physical products such as a carpet tile, the main impacts occur in the extraction and processing of raw materials. For machines that consume energy such as a car or a washing machine, the major impacts usually occur when the product is in use. You may find that the best product is one that doesn’t make claims such as ’100% natural’, but is carefully sourced, manufactured and shipped to minimise its environmental footprint at all stages of its life.

An assessment method that supports this is the Environmental Product Declaration (EPD). To achieve an EPD, companies must be committed to full disclosure of what is typically considered confidential information about how their products are made. In addition to publishing product “ingredients”, manufacturing locations and raw materials, companies must perform a comprehensive LCA, using industry-wide Product Category Rules (PCRs).

Rather than being a claim or promise, an EPD requires information on products to be shared in a standardised format, certified to a public standard and verified by a credible third party. Developed from ISO 14025 compliant lifecycle information, it allows customers to compare different products and assess which has the lowest environmental impacts. An EPD does not pass judgement; it simply presents the facts so that customers can draw their own conclusions. In simple terms it is the equivalent of the nutrition information on, say, a range of sandwiches which can help guide your lunchtime choice; you won’t necessarily go for the lowest calorie option but perhaps the one with the lowest fat content, depending on what is important to you.

To make true progress towards a more sustainable future, businesses need to be transparent about their environmental impacts. This means reporting not only on corporate impacts, such as greenhouse gas emissions, waste and water usage, but also on the environmental impact of their products, throughout their lifecycle. This will encourage healthy competition within industry to produce better, more genuinely sustainable products, rather than competing over clever claims or the best designed labels.

To see the article in The Guardian click here