Substantiating environmental claims under EmpCo

EmpCo's case-by-case rules under UCPD Articles 6 and 7 and its per se Annex I prohibitions both rest on the same principle: a green claim is defensible only if it can be substantiated with reliable, relevant and accessible evidence. With the Green Claims Directive paused, national regulators are already applying substantiation tests in the spirit of the failed proposal.

The evidence hierarchy

• Tier 1 — Recognised Type I ecolabel certification (EU Ecolabel, Nordic Swan, Blue Angel, EU organic logo). Unlocks generic claims relevant to the scheme's scope.
• Tier 2 — Recognised methodology with independent verification. ISO 14040/14044 LCA; Product Environmental Footprint where a PEFCR exists; ISO 14064 for GHG; EPDs to ISO 14025 / EN 15804.
• Tier 3 — Sector certification by an independent body meeting Article 2(r) (FSC, MSC, GOTS, Fairtrade, Bluesign, GRS).
• Tier 4 — Internal testing with documented methodology, only sufficient for narrow factual statements.

Specificity, scope, relevance

Beyond evidence quality, three properties drive defensibility. Specificity: quantify the attribute ("contains 80% post-consumer recycled aluminium"), don't rely on adjectives. Scope: identify exactly which part of the product or business is covered ("the cap is recycled" vs "the product is recycled"). Relevance: the evidence must map onto the entire claim — an FSC certificate does not substantiate "energy efficient".

Governance — the triple sign-off

Substantiation is also a governance problem. The most resilient programmes assign a named claims owner in sustainability, a legal reviewer and a commercial approver, with mandatory triple sign-off before any new green claim publishes. The UK CMA's 2024 undertakings with ASOS, Boohoo and Asda made training and supplier due diligence binding commitments.

Citations: UCPD Articles 6, 7 and Annex I (as amended by Directive (EU) 2024/825); ISO 14024, 14040, 14064, 14025; EU PEF/PEFCR methodology.