In recent years, voices clamoring for sustainable practices have reached an unprecedented pitch. This collective yearning for a greener future has spurred companies across the globe to align their products and services with the principles of sustainability. The proliferation of sustainability claims, while ostensibly a positive development, has, however, introduced a new layer of complexity for consumers and regulators alike. The growing prevalence of these claims necessitates a closer examination of their impact on consumers and the mechanisms through which they can be effectively regulated.

At the heart of the sustainability movement is the consumer, whose purchasing decisions are increasingly influenced by the environmental and social credentials of products. The allure of sustainability claims lies in their ability to resonate with the ethical convictions of consumers, promising a reduction in their ecological footprint through conscientious consumption. This phenomenon, known as “green consumerism,” has fostered a market where products adorned with eco-labels and sustainability certifications enjoy a competitive edge.

However, this landscape is fraught with challenges for consumers. The primary concern is the authenticity of sustainability claims, which can range from meticulously substantiated assertions to nebulous proclamations with little to no grounding in actual environmental or social impact. The term “greenwashing” aptly describes the latter, where companies exploit sustainability rhetoric for marketing purposes without implementing substantive changes in their operations. For consumers, navigating this minefield of claims can be daunting, leading to skepticism and decision paralysis. Moreover, the proliferation of sustainability claims has engendered a paradoxical effect; while intended to empower consumers, it often results in information overload, complicating the decision-making process rather than simplifying it.

THE PATH TO REGULATION
The regulation of sustainability claims presents a formidable challenge, necessitating a multi-faceted approach that encompasses standardization, transparency, and accountability. A critical first step is the development and enforcement of rigorous standards that define what constitutes a legitimate sustainability claim. These standards should be grounded in scientific evidence and developed in collaboration with environmental experts, industry stakeholders, and consumer advocacy groups to ensure their relevance and applicability across different sectors.

The international community is increasingly recognizing the peril of unfounded sustainability claims and it is grappling with how to manage this issue. The landscape remains diverse, with various approaches vying for effectiveness. Here are what other countries and economies have done, so far, to regulate sustainability claims:

• The European Union (EU) has implemented comprehensive guidelines for environmental claims, including the EU Ecolabel, a label awarded to products and services meeting high environmental standards throughout their lifecycle. The EU also enforces the Unfair Commercial Practices Directive, which prohibits misleading environmental claims.
• United States’ (US) Federal Trade Commission (FTC) publishes the Green Guides, which are designed to help marketers ensure that their environmental claims are truthful and non-misleading. The guides cover a wide range of claims, including biodegradability, compostability, and recyclability, providing examples of what may or may not constitute deceptive advertising.
• United Kingdom’s (UK) Advertising Standards Authority (ASA) rigorously enforces rules on environmental claims through its Code of Non-broadcast Advertising and Direct & Promotional Marketing (CAP Code). The code requires that advertisers hold evidence to substantiate their environmental claims, and that these claims do not exaggerate the environmental benefit.
• The Australian Competition & Consumer Commission (ACCC) has published guidelines on environmental claims in advertising and marketing. These guidelines emphasize the importance of truthful, accurate, and unambiguous claims, urging businesses to avoid broad, unspecific claims like “environmentally friendly” or “green” without substantiation.

A few weeks ago, the EU, on top of its Ecolabel policy, released one of the strictest policies on sustainability claims when it moved to effectively ban misleading environmental claims that rely on offsetting. News reports show that members of the European parliament voted to outlaw the use of terms such as “environmentally friendly,” “natural,” “biodegradable,” “climate neutral,” or “eco” without evidence, while introducing a total ban on using carbon offsetting schemes to substantiate the claims.

Under the new directive, only sustainability labels using approved certification schemes will be allowed by the bloc. It comes amid widespread concern about the environmental impact of carbon offsetting schemes, which have often been used to justify labeling products “carbon neutral,” or imply that consumers can fly, buy new clothes, or eat certain foods without making the climate crisis worse.

As regulations continue to evolve, various initiatives are also underway in Southeast Asia. Evidently, rapid economic growth in the region is accompanied by burgeoning environmental concerns.

Singapore Green Labelling Scheme (SGLS), managed by the Singapore Environment Council, evaluates products across various categories, from building materials to consumer electronics, based on their life cycle impact. It provides a transparent and reliable indication of environmental friendliness. This not only aids consumers in making informed decisions but also incentivizes manufacturers to adopt sustainable practices in their production processes. But it is done on a voluntary basis. Similarly, Thailand’s Green Label scheme, operated by the Thailand Environment Institute, encompasses a broad spectrum of products, including paper, textiles, and electronic devices, certifying those that minimize their ecological footprint through efficient resource use and reduced pollution. Indonesia also implements mandatory eco-labeling for certain products.

These schemes promote awareness, but concerns remain regarding consistency and enforcement. The patchwork approach creates confusion for consumers and uneven playing fields for businesses.

Transparency is yet another cornerstone of effective regulation. Companies should be mandated to disclose the methodologies and data underpinning their sustainability claims, allowing for independent verification. This could be facilitated through the establishment of a centralized database where information on the environmental and social impact of products is readily accessible to consumers and regulators. Such a system would not only enhance the credibility of sustainability claims but also empower consumers to make informed choices.

Accountability mechanisms are equally important. Regulatory bodies should have the authority to impose sanctions on companies that engage in misleading or false sustainability claims. This could include financial penalties, mandatory corrective advertising, or, in severe cases, the revocation of business licenses. The prospect of such repercussions would serve as a deterrent against greenwashing and incentivize companies to adhere to the principles of genuine sustainability.

CHARTING THE COURSE: TOWARDS A BALANCED APPROACH
Finding the right balance between fostering innovation and protecting consumers is crucial.

Here are some key considerations:

• Standardization: Establishing clear, internationally recognized definitions and verification methods for sustainability claims would level the playing field and enhance comparability.
• A Tiered Approach: A combination of self-regulation for low-risk claims and mandatory requirements for high-impact claims could incentivize responsible behavior while ensuring protection.
• Consumer Education: Empowering consumers through clear labeling, educational initiatives, and complaint mechanisms is vital for effective enforcement. Consumers equipped with knowledge can become the first line of defense against greenwashing.
• Global Collaboration: International cooperation is essential to create a level playing field, avoid regulatory arbitrage, and share best practices. A united front can create a more effective and comprehensive approach to tackling greenwashing.

Sustainability claims hold an immense benefit to guide consumer choices and drive positive change. But without effective regulation, greenwashing thrives, hindering progress and misleading consumers.

By implementing balanced, collaborative approaches that combine self-regulation, clear guidelines, and robust enforcement, we can silence the siren song of greenwashing and pave the way for a future where transparency empowers us to build a truly sustainable world.

The surging interest in sustainability, indeed, reflects a collective aspiration for a more equitable and environmentally resilient world. While sustainability claims have played a pivotal role in catalyzing this shift in consumer behavior, their proliferation has introduced significant challenges. For consumers, the task of discerning authentic claims from marketing ploys has become increasingly arduous.

By navigating this complex terrain with diligence and foresight, we can ensure that sustainability claims serve their intended purpose of guiding consumers towards a more sustainable future, rather than miring them in confusion and cynicism.

Ron F. Jabal, APR, is the chairman and CEO of PAGEONE Group (www.pageonegroup.ph) and founder of Advocacy Partners Asia (www.advocacy.ph).

ron.jabal@pageone.ph

rfjabal@gmail.com