Sustainability Labels under the EmpCo Directive

Labels are an effective marketing tool: at a glance they signal that a product meets certain standards. That is precisely why the EmpCo Directive (EU) 2024/825 pays particular attention to sustainability labels. A label only benefits consumers if there is a robust, verifiable basis behind it.

Which problem does the Directive address?

In recent years the number of environmental and sustainability labels has grown sharply. Many rely on independent certification schemes, but others rest on self-set, non-transparent or purely promotional criteria. Consumers can hardly distinguish whether a label documents verified performance or is merely a marketing mark. The Directive aims to reduce this uncertainty.

Which labels are considered risky?

Sustainability labels are considered particularly risky where they

• are not based on a recognised certification scheme, and
• were not introduced or recognised by a public authority.

This typically includes self-awarded labels without independent verification, marks without published criteria, or labels whose award procedure is not traceable. Such labels can create the impression of verified sustainability performance without any such verification having actually taken place.

How do you recognise a defensible basis?

A certification scheme tends to be defensible where it meets several characteristics:

• Transparent criteria. The requirements are publicly accessible and traceable.
• Independent verification. Compliance is checked by a body independent of the provider.
• Orderly procedure. There is a clear award and control procedure that goes beyond mere self-declaration.

Publicly introduced marks can also constitute a defensible basis. The precise classification in an individual case depends on the concrete design and should be checked legally where there is uncertainty.

What does this mean for your own labels?

Companies that use their own sustainability marks should review them critically. A self-designed logo that suggests sustainability without resting on a recognised, independent certification carries considerable risk. This does not mean that communicating your own sustainability performance becomes impossible – concrete, substantiated statements remain possible. A label-like mark, however, suggests an independent verification that should actually exist.

Which types of labels can be distinguished?

In practice, three basic types occur that must be assessed very differently:

• Labels certified by an independent body. They rest on published criteria and a review by an organisation independent of the provider. Such labels tend to be defensible, provided the underlying scheme is traceable.
• Publicly introduced or recognised marks. These too can constitute a defensible basis, because they rest on officially defined requirements.
• Self-awarded labels. Marks that a company grants itself without independent verification carry a high risk – regardless of how professionally they are designed.

This classification is an initial orientation but does not replace an assessment of the specific individual case.

What applies to ratings and rankings?

Rating systems, scores or environmental awards also come into view where they have a label-like effect. What matters is whether the underlying criteria are disclosed and verifiable and whether the assessment is carried out by an independent body. If an award is promoted without a transparent basis, this can trigger the same risk of misleading consumers as a non-transparent label.

How should businesses proceed?

A workable sequence involves several steps:

1. Take stock. Record all labels, seals and label-like marks on the website, packaging and in campaigns.
2. Check the basis. For each label, clarify whether it rests on a recognised certification scheme or a public-authority basis.
3. Decide. Labels without a defensible basis should be removed or replaced with concrete, substantiated statements.
4. Document. Record the basis on which each remaining label rests.

Conclusion

Sustainability labels remain a permissible instrument – but only with a recognised, verifiable basis. Self-awarded or non-transparent labels carry a high risk under the EmpCo Directive. Those who review their labels early and rely on robust certifications also strengthen credibility with customers. Because national implementation may vary and the classification of individual labels is complex, a legal review is advisable in case of doubt.