• The European Commission proposes to limit the market entry of new eco-labelling systems, in response to concerns about consumer confusion and mistrust.
Ecolabelling, which measures a product's environmental impact from its production to packaging and transport, is considered an important tool to help consumers make sustainable food choices. In recent years, a large number of eco-labels have entered the market, and the European Commission states that a considerable part of these labels (it is estimated that there are currently over 230 different eco-labels) are based on insufficient assessments.
In an attempt to eliminate fraudulent eco-labelling practices, the Commission is proposing two measures to regulate eco-labelling. New labeling systems should only be approved by Member States if they present a better ecological analysis than those currently on the market. Second, new labeling systems, if not developed at EU level, should be banned throughout the EU bloc.
In this sense, the Commission is preparing to present its own framework for sustainable labeling of food products. The European Commission's proposal is based on its own assessment of 232 active eco-labels in the EU.
Regulated labeling systems
Analyzes conducted by the European Commission also suggested that consumers were not aware of the distinction between labels regulated by third-party certification systems and those based on "self-certifications".
The proliferation of fake eco-labels and sustainability logos has already been identified as a persistent problem across the European Union. In an open public consultation, more than a quarter (27%) of participants agreed that the proliferation and lack of transparency and understanding of sustainability logos and labels on products and services is an obstacle to consumer accountability towards ecological transition.
Environmental labeling systems on the market include, among others, Eco Score, Planet Score and a new labeling system developed by Foundation Earth. They are based on different methodologies, from life cycle assessments (Life Cycle Assessment – LCA) to methods based on the ecological footprint.
In the Netherlands, Wageningen University & Research (WUR) it also contributes to the development of a standard methodology for measuring the impact of food products on the environment. Dr. Koen Boone, who is Europe Director of the Consortium for Sustainability and a WUR staff member, is involved in this project.
The researcher supports the Commission's approach to limit the number of eco-labels by establishing minimum criteria, so that consumers can be sure that the labels really prove the product's impact on the environment.
Establishing minimum criteria to be met
However, he is less convinced by the Commission's initiative to ban new labels from entering the market that do not demonstrate a superior explanation of the product's impact on the environment compared to others. "This could limit innovation and lead to consumer segmentation", he told Foodnavigator.
A research into the aspects related to the analysis and certification of eco-labels in the market showed that almost half of the label checks were superficial or not carried out at all.
Planet-Score, an eco-label with which more than 200 brands in 12 EU countries currently work, is based on the Life Cycle Assessment (LCA) methodology, but also addresses pesticide use, climate impact, biodiversity and animal welfare.
The team that developed the Planet-Score labeling system says it supports an eventual ban on new eco-labels that saturate the market, but at the same time believes that diversity and plurality are essential to promote sustainability efforts and encourage continuous improvement of assessment tools.
In the proposal, the Commission suggests a possible abandonment of a single standard methodology, such as the ecological footprint method, to justify environmental claims for all products.
Product Ecological Footprint (PEF) – a multi-criteria measure of the environmental performance of a product or service over its life cycle – is one such standard methodology currently used in the market.
Determination of the ecological footprint
Although the EC recognizes that ecological footprint methods can help manufacturing companies identify areas within their operations that require improvement, it concluded that they do not cover all relevant impact categories for all types of products.
In the case of food and agricultural products, for example, the Commission stated that biodiversity and nature conservation at the farm level, as well as different farming practices, are not taken into account. This can also be problematic with fish and textiles.
IFOAM Organics Europe approves the position of the Commission. "Indeed, the PEF method is not adapted to the reality of complex agro-food systems", said Jan Plagge, IFOAM president. "PEF does not properly consider pesticide use, the effects of different agricultural production methods on biodiversity, soil quality, deforestation, nor planetary limits."
Regarding the methodologies that should be used, IFOAM calls for an open debate to find the best solutions in providing consumers with detailed, accurate and unbiased information on the environmental impact of different methods of obtaining agri-food products.
Article written by Gabriela Dan, Editor of Arta Albă
Read on White Art and: Packaging – biodegradable innovations
