This post is third in a series based on discussions with John Polak, chair of the Global Ecolabelling Network. Part One is available here, and Part Two is available here.

The ecolabel trend is growing because companies are increasingly looking for environmental credentials, but as John Polak pointed out to me, ecolabels really serve two functions. On the one hand they’re marketing tools, and clearly effective at that. On the other hand they’re market-based policy tools.

As national and international organizations have realized, ecolabels can affect market change by swaying global purchasing behaviors. For example, if a government mandates that all government-funded purchases meet certain environmental standards, an auditable ecolabel is a good way to ensure compliance. Government purchasing in turn impacts private-sector business purchasing, and the two continue to feed off each other.

Interestingly, most of our government-based ecolabels in the US are not based on true eco-certification programs. Energy Star, for example, is probably the most well-known ecolabel here, but it’s a registration program, not a certification program like EcoLogo and others accredited by GEN. Companies register their products as meeting Energy Star criteria, but the claims are many times unproven.

As GEN continues to meet and talk with organizations like the WTO, ecolabels and certification programs are likely to play an increasingly important role in global commerce. Even if you’re not a fan of globalization, there are certainly benefits when the positive policy tools of one country or multinational organization have the power to impact behavior worldwide.

Posted by Mari in Environmental standards