standards, certifications, and eco-labels: toward a ... · • certification institutions confer...

1/10/2009

1

STANDARDS, CERTIFICATIONS & ECO LABELS: Toward a

Timothy M. SmithUniversity of Minnesota, CSED

& ECO-LABELS: Toward a comprehensive product stewardship approach

MPCA Public ForumJanuary 9, 2009

What is Product Stewardship?

“Product Stewardship" is a principle that directs p p pall those involved in the life cycle of a product to take shared responsibility for reducing the health and environmental impacts that result from the production, use, and end-of-life management of the product.

MPCA Public Forum on Certification & Eco-labels, January 9, 2009 ©2009 T. M. Smith & S.A. Enzler

1/10/2009

2

APPROACHES TO PRODUCT‐BASED IMPACTS

Product Impacts and Approaches to Environmental Performance Improvement

EPR/Product Stewardship

Vendor Scorecards

EcolabelsPub Proc

Prod-based EMSStandards/Certs.Reporting

Substance Restrictions

Standards/Certs.

Product Flows

Consumer Behavior InfluenceMaterial/Commodity Flows

Product/

StewardshipScorecards Pub. Proc.ReportingRestrictions

Releases to the Environment & Potential Impacts


ExtractionTransport/Logistics

Process Des. & Ops

Supply Logistics

Product/ Process Design &Operations

Outbound Logistics

Channels Dist.

UseEnd of Life Mgmt.

Reduce/Reuse/Recycle Material Feedback Loops

Big Questions Around Standards, Certification and Labeling

• Standard Development

• Leadership vs. Consensus Standards

• Additionality vs. Continuous Improvement

• Multi-Attribute vs. Single Attribute

• Conformance/Certification

• “3rd party” vs. “Independent” governance

• Track & Trace vs. Book & Trade vs. Mass Balance

• Labeling


• Type I, Type II, Type III (ISO) – …and the like?

• Binary vs. percent claims vs. indexed claims

1/10/2009

3

Overview of the U.S. Standardization System Framework defined in the United States Standards Strategy

• Market driven

• Flexible and sector-based

• Industry-led and government-supported

This system is designed to . . .

Support a broad range of stakeholder engagement

Address emerging priorities and new technologies


www.us-standards-strategy.org

Allow stakeholders to find the solutions that best fit

their respective needs

Overview of the U.S. Standardization SystemTypes of Developers

• ANSI-Accredited Standards Developers

– Currently 217

• Standards developers not accredited by ANSI

• Consortia (U.S. based and international)

• Industry

• Government military specifications (Mil Specs)


Government military specifications (Mil Specs)

• Other government standards/specifications

• Other?

1/10/2009

4

Conceptualizing Certification Institutions

• Certification institutions must include two components:

– Rules (codes of conduct, guidelines, written practices)

– Conformance Reports (corporate reports, seals, certificates)

• Certification institutions are:

– formal rules, norms, standards and procedures voluntarily adopted or contracted by firms and the organizations that draft, monitor, and enforce compliance with these standards.

• Certification institutions confer reputation as a collective good in a context of uncertainty


a context of uncertainty


+ International Labels

1/10/2009

5

American National Standards Institute

• ANSI is an accreditor of Consensus Standards

• ANSI accreditation provides an assurance of:

– Openness – All materially affected parties have the opportunity to participate in

standards development – either as a voting member or a public review commenter

– Balance – Shall be sought with respect to membership on an ANS consensus

body

– Consensus – Decisions by more than a simple majority (not unanimity);

consideration of all duly submitted comments


– Due Process – Written, documented appeals process

TransparencyOpenness

Due Process

Consensus

Sustainability Related Activities

ANSI’s Involvement

ANSI-Led Initiatives

• ANSI Conference for Food Protection

ANSI Partnerships/Participation

• Partner in DOE Superior Energy

• Sustainable Forestry Initiative Chain of Custody (SFI CoC) and/or the PEFC Chain of Custody (PEFC CoC)

• ANSI Pilot Accreditation for Green House Gas Validation/Verification Bodies

• ANSI Biofuels Standards Coordination Panel

• ANSI-NAM Network on Chemical Regulation

p gyPerformance Program (SEP)

• Food Safety Initiatives (Safe Quality Foods, GMA, etc.)

• NIBS High Performance Building Council Member

• High Performance Building Caucus Member


• Co-Secretariat with Brazil: ISO/TC Project Committee 242 Energy Management (ISO 5001)

Standards and Conformity Assessment activities related to sustainability span a wide range of sectors and interests

1/10/2009

6

What about Leadership Standards?

If, consensus → maximizes market and regulatorymarket and regulatory acceptance


Then, Leadership → ?? niche ??

Tiered Certification – LEED & Green Seal LaureateEntry Level:This will be the entry level for most companies that have made some progress and are ahead of many of their sector peers. Green Seal will

LEED-NC 2.2Possible points: 69

Certified: 26 – 32 points

conduct a company-wide LCA and provide a summary of impacts. The applicant will demonstrate that changes have been made and set goals for silver level recognition.

Advanced Level:This advanced level recognition is for companies that have achieved some innovative reductions in their key environmental impacts and have

Silver: 33 – 38 points

Gold: 39 – 51 points


pdeveloped and are acting upon a deeper life cycle understanding of their products' impacts.

Top Tier:This top tier is for the outstanding leaders and innovators in their sector who have achieved deep reductions in their environmental impacts.

Platinum: 52 points and up

1/10/2009

7

Sustainability Related Activities Examples of ANSI-ASDs in the sustainability arena

ASTM International

Leonardo Academy

NSF International

American Society of Agricultural and Biological Engineers

Greenguard Environmental Institute

Underwriters Laboratories Inc.

Green Seal

GreenBuildingInitiative

U.S. GreenBuildingCouncil


And more than 200 additional organizations

American Societyof Heating, Refrigerating and Air-ConditioningEngineers

Business and InstitutionalFurnitureManufacturersAssociation

American National Standards InstituteANSI as an accreditor of certification bodies

ANSI

Standards Conformity Assessment Activities

SDOs and

U.S. TAGs

ANSI Procedures

“Essential

Requirements”

ProductCertifiers

PersonnelCertifiers

ISO/IEC

17065

ISO/IEC

17024

Management System

Certifiers LaboratoriesInspection

Bodies

ISO/IEC

17021

ISO/IEC

17025

ISO/IEC

17020


1/10/2009

8

Are separate acceditors and certifiers necessary?


Certification Initiatives in the Building Sector (Walsh 2006)

• “Consensus-based” Initiatives (Really?)

– The most reliable are those that are developed through a consensus negotiation process.g p

• Industry Sponsored Initiatives

– selective "standards" represented by these labels are not negotiated in the public interest with legitimate stakeholders. They are one dimensional or least- common-denominator standards at best, and in some cases they undermine superior consensus standards.

• Independent Initiatives

i d d t tifi ti b ddi t k t f i


– independent certifications may be adding to market confusion by competing with each other in some areas, and are often financially dependent upon manufacturer revenues

• I’m not convinced there is any consistent difference.

1/10/2009

9

Biofuels Certification – the end-all-be-all?


(Schmitz 2007)

Early Attempts toward a Meta-Standard Approach for Biofuels

• Feedstock level Certifications


(Woods 2007)

1/10/2009

10

Still OK? All in the eyes of the beholder…RSPO: Roundtable on Sustainable Palm Oil

FSC (Plantations): Forest Stewardship Council

RTRS: Roundtable on Responsible Soy (draft)

Land Use Env. impact assessment prior to establishing new or expand

Only plantations established before FSC in 1994, or

Assessment of social and environmental impacts prior

planting or operations; Demonstrate continuous improvement

established on degraded lands (reforestation), or substituting agricultural uses

to establishment of new infrastructure or expansion of soy cultivation

HighConservation Value (HCV) Areas

Shall be identified and taken into account in managementplans and operations

Decisions should always be considered in the context of a precautionary approach

Respect for areas agreed to be inappropriate for commercial soy cultivation

Soil Degradation Maintain fertility that ensures sustainable yield

Maintain structure, fertility, and biological quality

Maintain quality and fertility.

Pesticides and Chemical Use

WHO Type 1A/1B and banned by international agreement

WHO Type 1A/1B and banned by international agreement banned

Responsible handling and use


Chemical Use by international agreement reduced and/or eliminated

international agreement banned use.

GMOs Not addressed Strictly prohibited Not addressedSmallholders/ Indigenouspeople

Exclusions; documented fair dealings; UN/ILO declarations apply

Long‐term social/economic well being; shall not threaten or diminish resources/tenure rights

Certification/Governance

Online book and trade Track and trace (COC) TBD

Still OK? All in the eyes of the beholder…RSPO: Roundtable on Sustainable Palm Oil

FSC (Plantations): Forest Stewardship Council

RTRS: Roundtable on Responsible Soy (draft)

Land Use Env. impact assessment prior to establishing new or expand

Only plantations established before FSC in 1994, or

Assessment of social and environmental impacts prior

planting or operations; Demonstrate continuous improvement

established on degraded lands (reforestation), or substituting agricultural uses

to establishment of new infrastructure or expansion of soy cultivation

HighConservation Value (HCV) Areas

Shall be identified and taken into account in managementplans and operations

Decisions should always be considered in the context of a precautionary approach

Respect for areas agreed to be inappropriate for commercial soy cultivation

Soil Degradation Maintain fertility that ensures sustainable yield

Maintain structure, fertility, and biological quality

Maintain quality and fertility.

Pesticides and Chemical Use

WHO Type 1A/1B and banned by international agreement

WHO Type 1A/1B and banned by international agreement banned

Responsible handling and use.


Chemical Use by international agreement reduced and/or eliminated

international agreement banned use.

GMOs Not addressed Strictly prohibited Not addressedSmallholders/ Indigenouspeople

Exclusions; documented fair dealings; UN/ILO declarations apply

Long‐term social/economic well being; shall not threaten or diminish resources/tenure rights

Recognition/respect;consent & compensation; contribution to Sust. Dev.

Certification/Governance

Online book and trade Track and trace (COC) and Mass Balance (% claims)

TBD

1/10/2009

11

Eco-labeling

• So…We can agree on a standard “rules of the game”– We can agree on a standard rules of the game …

– We can agree that sufficient hoops, held by the right people, were jumped through and a product/process/organization is in “conformance”…

• Now, how do we communicate this achievement?


• Mandatory Labels

• ISO Type I (and Type I–like) labels:

– Guide the consumer in purchasing quality products with fewer adverse

Eco-Labeling

Guide the consumer in purchasing quality products with fewer adverse environmental impacts

– Encourage manufacturers to “develop and supply environmentally sound products”

– Voluntary “market-oriented instrument of environmental policy,” often requiring independent (third-party) registration/verification.

• ISO Type II labels:

– Voluntary

– Represent self-declaration


– No independent (third-party) registration/verification

• ISO Type III (and Type III–like) labels:

– Voluntary

– Require quantified environmental information

– Based on the ISO 14040 series of standards

1/10/2009

12

Some certifications are still only Self-claims (Type II)


– GE’s "Ecomagination" and Home Depot’s “Eco Options” are examples of internal certification programs.

Advertising Regulation in the United States

• Federal Trade Commission Act – Unfair or deceptive acts or practices in or affecting commerce are prohibited.

– Objective claims in advertising must be substantiatedObjective claims in advertising must be substantiated

• State statutes – “Little FTC Acts.”

– A number of states (including MN) have adopted "consumer fraud" statutes containing language similar to the following:

• The act, use, or employment by any person of any deception, deceptive act or practice, fraud, false pretense, false promise, misrepresentation, or concealment, suppression, or omission of any material fact with intent that others rely upon such concealment suppression or


intent that others rely upon such concealment, suppression or omission, in connection with the sale or advertisement of any merchandise whether or not any person has in fact been misled, deceived, or damaged thereby, is declared to be an unlawful practice.

1/10/2009

13

Plus Specific Statutes

• Cigarettes & smokeless tobacco health warnings.

• Truth in Lending credit advertising disclosures.

• FDA drug-approval laws – claims that a product may prevent, mitigate or cure any disease must be approved by FDA.

• FIFRA – (EPA) claims a product kills organisms (pesticides, disinfectants).

• FTC Guides on automobile mileage claims (based on EPA


• FTC Guides on automobile mileage claims (based on EPA mileage guides).

• State laws on Sweepstakes.

Federal Trade Commission Green Guides

• Apply Section 5 of FTC Act to environmental advertising and marketing

• Apply to: labeling, advertising, promotional materials, etc. through words, symbols emblems logos depictions brand names etc in connection withsymbols, emblems, logos, depictions, brand names, etc. in connection with sale or marketing of any product or package.

• Not enforceable regulations, and do not preempt other regulations.

• Conduct inconsistent with the positions articulated in these guides may result in corrective action (i.e. lawsuit)

• General Principles


– Qualifications and disclosures should be clear and prominent

– Must be a clear distinction between benefits of product and package

– Do not overstate environmental attributes, expressly or by implication

– Basis for comparative claims must be made clear, and advertiser should substantiate claim

1/10/2009

14

FTC GreenGuides: Specific Environmental Marketing Claims Covered• General environmental benefit claims must be substantiated

• Degradable/biodegradable/photodegradable claims

– Where customarily disposed of

– Rate and extent of degradation

• Compostable claims

• Recyclable

– Collected, separated from waste stream for use as raw material (does not allow reuse of products)

– Unqualified claims: minor, incidental components allowed to be non-recyclable

– Limited availability of recycling program must be noted


• Recycled content

– Pre- and Post-consumer waste that has been recovered or diverted from solid waste stream

• Source Reduction

• Refillable packaging requires infrastructure

• Ozone safe / ozone friendly

Puffery in Advertising

• Exaggerated commendation - Inherently erodes credibility as a trustworthy message

• Basically, an opinion statement about the product:

– “More pure pleasure” (Camel)

– “Better Ingredients” (PapaJohn’s Pizza)

– "The best in the business" (AT&T)

– "The best part of waking up is Folger’s in your cup“


– "Trojan: America’s #1 condom“

• Legal and well-defined by law.

– Does not embrace misstatements of material facts (FTC)

– FTC regulates Deception, not falsity

http://www.chickenhead.com/truth/camel4.html

1/10/2009

15

Environmental Examples Abound

• In 1999, "greenwash" entered the official lexicon of the English language through its inclusion in the Oxford English Dictionary.

• Defines greenwash as: "Disinformation disseminated by an organization so as to present an environmentally responsible public image.“


TerraChoice Environmental Marketing Inc. (November 2007)

Environmental Examples Abound

• “Cleaner than you think.”y

• “Autos manufactured today are virtually emission-free.”

– exaggerates the auto industry’s solution to smog-forming emissions, while concealing its worsening problem with heat- trapping

i i


emissions.

1/10/2009

16

Selected Type I eco-labels and certification programs


Selected Type I eco-labels and certification programs


Sources: IFOAM, FLO, PEFC, eco-labels.org, eco-label.com, FAO, EISA, Ahold website

1/10/2009

17

Examples of FSC on product labels


Type III Label: Environmental Product Declaration

Environmental Product DeclarationZIEGELEI GASSER MATTONAIA masonry units clay bricks Precertification. Version 2004-03-14. Number: S-EP-00011


Source: Global Type III Environmental Product Declaration Networkhttp://www.environdec.com/

1/10/2009

18

EPD of building products in the German AUB declaration system


U.S. EPD


1/10/2009

19

Big Questions Around Standards, Certification and Labeling

• Standard Development

• Leadership vs. Consensus Standards

• Additionality vs. Continuous Improvement

• Multi-Attribute vs. Single Attribute

• Conformance/Certification

• “3rd party” vs. “Independent” governance

• Track & Trace vs. Book & Trade vs. Mass Balance

• Labeling


• Type I, Type II, Type III (ISO) – …and the like?

• Binary vs. percent claims vs. indexed claims, EPD

• Looks like we have it all figured out… until it changes…

Recent Changes to LEED 2009

• Large Changes to Energy and Sustainable Site Categories

– Additional Points to Development Density and Access to Alternative Transportation

N l 2X P i t il bl f O ti i d E P f d R bl– Nearly 2X Points available for Optimized Energy Performance and Renewables

– New Mandatory Water Use Reduction Prerequisite

• Large Reductions in overall importance of Materials and Indoor Env. Quality to the system

LEED 2.2 LEED 2009 Change

Sustainable Site 14 20.3% 26 23.6% 3.3%

Water Efficiency 5 7.2% 10 9.1% 1.8%

& h


Energy & Atmosphere 17 24.6% 35 31.8% 7.2%

Materials & Resources 13 18.8% 14 12.7% ‐6.1%

Indoor Environmental Quality 15 21.7% 15 13.6% ‐8.1%

Innovation & Design 5 7.2% 6 5.5% ‐1.8%

Regional Bonus Credits 0 0.0% 4 3.6% 3.6%

69 110 0.00%

1/10/2009

20

THANK YOU!

[email protected]


(Scientific American, June 2003)

A Policy Pathway(A T P P h)(A Two Part Path)

1/10/2009

21

Part 1: Selecting the Criteria

1. Do nothing

2 Pi k t d d th t ill b t lli2. Pick a standard that will be controlling

3. Identify key environmental factors and set minimum levels for each factor (Create a standard from state priorities)


4. Create a “meta standard”

Doing Nothing

• A proliferation of private competing standards will develop (-)( )

• Drive to the floor (-)

• The differing standards measure different things so not clear what you get (-)

• May not highlight what science


• May not highlight what science demonstrates is most important to Minnesota’s environment (-)

• Promotes market innovation (+)

1/10/2009

22

Pick One – California and LEED Silver

• Establishes an environmental standard above the regulatory floor (+)above the regulatory floor ( )

• Permits focus on important environmental criteria (+)

• Favors one market mechanism and thus perceived as unfair ( )


perceived as unfair (-)

• Inflexible (-)

Specifying Important Factors – Set Minimum Criteria for Each Factor

• Permits policy makers to identify most important environmental indicators (+)

• Permits policy makers to set minimum criteria above floor (+)

• Does not pick among competing standards

• May limit innovation (-)

• Permits some degree of flexibility with certainty (-)


• More time consuming then relying on existing standards (-)

• Controversial (-)

• Does it permit balancing between factors

1/10/2009

23

Create a “Meta” Standard

• Permits policy makers to pick and choose among various criteria in private mechanisms (+)

• Establishes an environmental standard above the regulatory floor (+)

• Permits focus on important environmental criteria (+)


• Time consuming (-)

• No control over changes in standard

• Impact on innovation unclear (?)

Part 2: Applying the Criteria

• Mandate the criteria for all business conducted in Minnesotaconducted in Minnesota

• Use government procurement to drive criteria

• Use access to government funding or contracts to drive the criteria


contracts to drive the criteria

• Tax incentives

1/10/2009

24

Procurement Govt. Funding Other

Policy Path Matrix

Do Nothing

Pick Standard

Create


Create

Meta Standard

Discussion Questions

• What are the opportunities and/or barriers to each “criteria setting” mechanisms?to each criteria setting mechanisms?

• What are the pros/cons or advantages/disadvantage of each criteria setting Mechanism


standards, certifications, and eco-labels: toward a ... · • certification institutions confer...

Documents