Environmental labels and declarations (or ecolabels) are instruments to communicate the environmental performance of products. The relevance of environmental communication has been highlighted in Europe as far back in the 2000s when the Integrated Product Policy has been settled. Nowadays, environmental labelling is among the policy tools supported by the European Commission (EC) in the improvement of sustainable production and consumption practices. However, ecolabels around the world have developed in many varieties and forms, due to the different communication purposes, target groups and aims they have. The ecolabels existing on the market barely can fit under any existing classification, including the one from the International Organization for Standardization (ISO). ISO manages the 14020-suite of standards designated to provide a framework for ecolabels development. The current ISO classification consists of three types: Type I ecolabels, Type II self-declared claims and Type III environmental product declarations. The lack of operational classification and systematic approach for characterization of ecolabels is confusing for many users, as well as hinders the research work towards the improvement of their reliability and credibility. In this regard, credible ecolabels are considered those that are based on transparent operation and on scientifically-sound methodology for criteria development and assessment. A method worth exploring in ecolabelling is Life Cycle Assessment (LCA). Already proven and popular in business-to-business (B2B) setting (e.g., in Type III declarations), it is still criticised and not fully explored whether it is applicable in business-to-consumer (B2C) communication. The objective of this work is to enhance the communication of environmental product information through improved characterization and harmonization of ecolabels. Two research questions are defined and answered to meet this objective, depicting two focus areas of the thesis: firstly, the area of characterization and classification of ecolabels and secondly, the application of LCA for harmonization in ecolabelling. This thesis is based on four peer-reviewed journal publications. Improvements in the characterization of ecolabels are achieved by the development of a characterization scheme. It is a result of the investigation of a sample of 45 ecolabels and a literature review of existing publications on ecolabel classification and characterization. Based on the gained information, gaps of the ISO classification are highlighted. The application and performance of the scheme is further tested in a case study by characterizing the Cradle to Cradle Certified™ Products Program (C2C Certified for short) as a tool for external environmental communication. Due to the formerly missing operational way to characterize ecolabels, some questions related to their overall harmonization and particularly to the application of LCA in ecolabels were still open. Thus, the work further focuses on LCA-based ecolabels (such as Type III declarations) and the existing approaches for harmonization of product category rules (PCR). By a desktop research, Type III-like programmes are identified, classified, and evaluated. Trends in their development along the years are observed. Regarding the overview of existing harmonization attempts, 16 initiatives categorized as guidelines, standards and technical specifications, collaborative platforms and other activities related to mutual recognition between parties are examined. Focus is given on the Guidelines for Product Category Rule Development (GPCRD) and the EC’s Product Environmental Footprint initiative (PEF). A road test to align a draft PCR with the requirements of the GPCRD is conducted to evaluate the ability of the Guidelines to facilitate this process in a consistent manner. PEF is analysed from the perspective of an LCA-based instrument for environmental communication. It is compared with a typical Type I ecolabel – the European Ecolabel (EUF) – by conducting three case studies on detergents, paints, and t-shirts to show the interfaces between the two approaches. With the information obtained by the reciprocal analysis, three different perspectives for mutual integration and co-existence are examined. The first version of the ecolabel characterization scheme contains 18 attributes, classified in four groups. Each attribute comprises two to five options to select among. For example, the attribute “End-user focus” consists of three options: “B2C”, “B2B” or “both”. The characterization of the ecolabels from the sample by employing the scheme shows that ecolabels apply different awarding formats and criteria in combinations and forms that are not recognized and described by ISO. Only around 40% of the ecolabels from the sample can be assigned to Type I and Type III. None of them declares to be Type II. As a result, a list of recommendations for improvement to ISO on seven different topics is derived. As an outcome of the case study on C2C Certified, an upgraded ecolabel characterization scheme is issued, consisting of five groups with 22 refined attributes. Proposals for improvement of C2C Certified as a communication tool are also determined. As regards the harmonization of ecolabels and LCA application in ecolabelling, 48 Type-III-like programmes are listed. The results reveal that e.g., 56% of them operate in Europe, against 28% in North America. The majority cover the building and construction sector. The practical test of GPCRD concludes that the PCR alignment process is an attainable task and that GPCRD is a good complementary tool for Type III operators to strengthen their programme instructions. Several aspects for improvement and necessary common agreements between operators are listed to assure consistent PCR alignment. As regards the comparison of PEF with EUF, few similarities and many divergences between the two approaches are noted. PEF is a relative approach and provides information on the potential life cycle environmental impacts, whereas the Type I ecolabel criteria are issue-specific and do not necessarily cover the complete life cycle of the product. Further, three perspectives are examined: PEF, EUF and Joint. The first two explore scenarios for mutual integration and co-existence between PEF and EUF. The joint perspective proposes a concept for an LCA-based hybrid ecolabel, building upon the synergies between a classic Type I and a Type III. The Type IV ecolabel, as called, allows for an overall harmonized and improved communication both on B2B and B2C level. This thesis contributes to the scientific work on the enhancement of ecolabels characterization and harmonization. Its significance and actuality are justified by the current developments in standardization of ecolabels and communication of environmental information on both international and European level. The developed ecolabel characterization scheme is applicable for variety of cases and users; it is also considered as a foundation for improved ecolabels classification. As regards harmonization, the proposed Type IV hybrid ecolabel is an example of an action for reducing the proliferation of ecolabels.


    Access

    Download

    Check availability in my library


    Export, share and cite



    Title :

    Communication of environmental product information:.
    Charakterisierung und Harmonisierung von Umweltzeichen


    Subtitle :

    characterization and harmonization of ecolabels


    Additional title:

    Kommunikation von Umweltproduktinformationen:


    Contributors:

    Publication date :

    2020



    Type of media :

    Miscellaneous


    Type of material :

    Electronic Resource


    Language :

    Unknown



    Classification :

    DDC:    629



    Baumaschinen mit Umweltzeichen

    Online Contents | 1997


    Formulierungsstrategien fuer unterschiedliche Umweltzeichen

    Bongardt,F. / Rhein Chemie Rheinau,Mannheim,DE | Automotive engineering | 2011



    Harmonisierung im Stadtbahnsektor

    Jänig, Nil / Plogstert, Steffen | IuD Bahn | 2003


    Harmonisierung schreitet voran

    Altermatt, Robert | IuD Bahn | 2003