Most manufacturers provide emissions and end-of-life management information in their show rooms, although this is probably the first instance of shaping such information into a bespoke eco-label.

As a multi-stakeholder organization whose most powerful constituents are most of the world’s national standards bodies, formulation of ISO’s standards takes a significant amount of time.  Talk of the need for a social standard at the ISO level began in 2001.  By July 2010, the working group on the standard had “450 participating experts and 210 observers from 99 ISO member countries and 42 liaison organizations”.  Leadership on the ISO 26000 social standard is being taken by the national standards bodies of Sweden and Brazil.   The standard was published in early 2011 as the ISO 26000:2010 – Guidance on Social Responsibility. 

Unlike the ISO 14000 series of standards, the ISO 26000 is not a management system and will not entail any certification process.  ISO strongly states: “Any offers to certify, or claims to be certified, to ISO 26000 would be a misrepresentation of the intent and purpose of the International Standard."

It is likely that the standard will be used primarily by large companies as an input into their own CSR programs, although with most Fortune 500 companies already having well established CSR policy, its within this is unclear.  Due to the fact that it is not a third party certified standard, it is unlikely to be used as a supplier screening tool for buying or partner selection – there are numerous standards, such as SA 8000, FLA, the ILO based standard and others which overlap heavily with the content of ISO 26000 and are third party certified.

(See our 2011 article on the Fair Trade USA split from Fairtrade International).    

The Better Cotton Initiative  was established in 2005 in response to these pressures and in an attempt to draw together under one umbrella the various sustainability pressures faced by the global cotton industry.   As with many standards-organizations, it started life as a multi-stakeholder group, based on Switzerland:  “the founding members are adidas, Gap Inc., H&M, ICCO, IFAP, IFC, IKEA, Organic Exchange, Oxfam, PAN UK, and WWF”.   While its mission is “to make global cotton production better for the people who produce it, better for the environment it grows in and better for the sector’s future”, the group does not at present have a third-party audited label which cotton producers and users may deploy in marketing.  Rather, the initiative has as its members some of the world’s largest users of cotton who are pressuring their supply chain on the sustainability issues in question.  In parallel with this, the BCI works in partnership with grass roots groups to train farmers.   For example, UK retailer M&S is funding a BCI project with WWF in India and its first harvest has shown an 80% reduction in pesticides and cut water usage by half.  BCI is focusing on a few regions at first.  “During the implementation start-up phase (2010-2012), the BCI geographical focus is on four regions: Brazil, India, Pakistan and West & Central Africa (Benin, Burkina Faso, Cameroon, Mali, Senegal, Togo). These regions include a diversity of climatic conditions, farm sizes, agricultural practices and environmental and social impacts”.    So the BCI uses its implementation program to define what is “BCI-certified” – only that produce which originates from BCI-backed projects in the field – currently around 100,000 farmers in these four regions.  So scaling up is a major challenge.  However, Lise Melvin, Executive Director of BCI notes that BCI-cotton in India and Pakistan yielded 100,000 tonnes, which she compares to Fairtrade cotton with 35,000 tonnes, but compares with a global harvest of 25 million tonnes.  Thus at 0.4% of global output the potential for expansion is huge.

An interesting start-up emerging to fill this gap is Goodguide, a US venture founded in 2007.  It provides a directory of 145,000 products (food, toys, personal care, & household products) and claims to allow consumers to learn about “to easily learn about the best and worst products in a category” and “simplify complex and confusing product information” on environmental, safety and ethical issues.  The company employs scientific methods to evaluate chemical, pollution and other risks posed by the products, with the output being a simple comparative rating on a scale of 0 to 10.  The system is designed to help consumers tell the “difference between 'good companies' and good marketing.  The role of Goodguide is to do the technical work for the consumer and offer a comparative choice between different brands and products in similar categories.  This is a glaring gap in the use of eco-labels that tend to be binary in nature (i.e. the product either has it or it does not) with the detailed assessment criteria often confusing to the consumer.  The site has proved hugely popular in the last few years (it is a top 100 Website in the US) with Goodguide ratings appearing in leading retail chains such as Walmart.  An iphone app allows scanning of the bar code of a product in the store to draw up the Goodguide score.  In another development a new iphone app allows consumers to decipher eco-label data. 

Goodguide states that certification to standards provides one input to its evaluation, with the weighting applied to these certifications depending on the product category.  It is clear, however, that disparate consumer eco labels dealing with single issues or products may not be the answer in the long term with certain exceptions (where a single issue is very, very critical to a sector’s public image, such as child labor with sports shoes or ethical trade with coffee/bananas).

• The standard will be global.
• Address economic, environmental and social aspects of water usage.
• Designed to be implemented by a legal entity that utilizes a particular watershed.
• Designed to be used at the site/facility level; and not focus on products.
• Is more likely to be used by water management companies than their customers or supply chains.

A first draft of the standard is due in March 2012, with 2013 targeted for final release.   Any questions or comments should be directed to the Global Water Roundtable Coordinator, Alexis Morgan (alexis.morgan@wwfus.org).

By Ekobai Contributor

New retail figures show that organic baby food sales are bucking the trend in the UK rising by 44 percent since 2006 (reaching £135m in 2010). 

UK shoppers have been cutting down on purchases of organic foods generally since the start of the global recession in 2008, leading to a 20 percent drop in sales in the past three years.

However, retail analyst Mintel reports that nearly two in five families with an infant under one think it is worth paying premium prices for organic food, the implication being that organic is generally considered to be better quality and more nutritious. 

Quoted in the Daily Mail newspaper,  the Soil Association's  deputy director Roger Mortlock said: ‘We’ve always known that parents have been particularly concerned about what their children are eating in terms of pesticides and where the food comes from. It is the first sector where we got over 50 per cent of market penetration. Our challenge is to keep parents buying it for their children once they are beyond toddler age.’

The Leaping Bunny label received a further boost in the UK cruelty-free market recently through a partnership with leading animal welfare charity the RSPCA.

The RSPCA will now direct supporters to the international product certification scheme, describing it as "The most widely recognised system for identifying cosmetics products that are free from animal testing". This is part of the RSPCA's widely-praised effort to use consumer power to reduce suffering for animals. 

Consumers looking for products which are free from animal testing can now access the comprehensive list of certified companies via the RSPCA website, introducing Leaping Bunny certified products to a large new customer base.

High-profile certified companies include M&S, Superdrug, Sainsbury’s, The Co-operative, Method, Martha Stewart and Liz Earle.

Leaping Bunny certified companies should ensure they are listed on the BUAV’s Go Cruelty Free website to maximise exposure and benefit from the association with the RSPCA in the UK.

Cosmetic and household product companies seeking cruelty free certification in the UK and Europe can apply via the Go Cruelty Free website. Companies in the US and Canada should visit LeapingBunny.org. Ekobai features a wide range of Leaping Bunny certified companies and products. 

Find out more about cruelty free standards. 

By Ekobai Contributor, Renewable Energy

WindMade, the technical standard for the first global consumer label for companies to buy wind power and other clean renewable energy launched last month.

The label will identify organisations and products that use wind power in their operations or production and is backed by companies and organisations including WWF, Vestas Wind Systems, the Global Wind Energy Council (GWEC), the LEGO Group, Bloomberg and PricewaterhouseCoopers. 

Interested parties can apply to use the label to communicate the share of wind power and other renewable sources in their overall power consumption demand. The standard requires that a minimum of 25 per cent of electricity consumption is from wind power. 

The wind energy share can be procured through a company-owned wind power generation facility, a long-term Power Purchase Agreement for wind power, or the purchase of high quality Renewable Energy Certificates approved by WindMade. The exact percentage of the wind energy share will be stated on the label.

WindMade is the first ecolabel to be supported by the UN Global Compact. Georg Kell, Executive Director of UN Global Compact stated: “It is fully aligned with our mission to promote greater corporate sustainability as the critical business contribution to sustainable development. As a tangible and meaningful consumer label, WindMade can go a long way in advancing the use of renewable energy around the globe.”

The UN Global Compact is hosting a launch event in New York on 18 November where the first companies and brands to be certified under the WindMade ecolabel scheme, will be revealed.

If the new label gains consumer traction, it could help significantly boost the renewable energy sector. 

By Ekobai Contributor

Nineteen major food companies have united under the Dutch Initiative for Sustainable Soy (IDS) to purchase the first 85,000 tonnes of soybeans produced to standards set by the first Round Table on Responsible Soy (RTRS).

The food and animal feed companies include Unilever, Cargill, ADM and Nutreco.

It is estimated that production capacity of RTRS-certified farmers will be 500,000 tonnes by 2012, rising to 1.8 million tonnes by 2015.

The RTRS’s certification standard was agreed in 2009 by some 150 stakeholders, including NGOs, producers and traders. Its chief concern is that no native forest, or land of ‘high conservation value’, will be cleared for soy farming. The standard is supported by the WWF but has been criticised by Friends of the Earth which fears it will encourage the expansion of unsustainable soy farming elsewhere.

The Netherlands is one of the main gateways for soybeans in Europe, mainly for animal feed. Globally, its imports are second only to China’s.

As consumer awareness of certified soy grows, smaller food and feed companies will have to ensure that they source soybeans produced under RTRS standards.  

Source: Green Futures

The FSC has just released its annual market survey of its FSC certified companies for 2010. It was a year in which the 20,000th FSC chain of custody certificate was issued – marking tremendous growth in just two years (FSC hit 15,000 CoC certificated in 2008). The 2010 survey was executed in 13 languages, and includes respondents from 3500 companies in more than 29 countries. The results show that FSC continues to gain momentum in developed and emerging markets worldwide. It also shows the high value placed on the FSC brand a marketing tool for certified companies. 

Key findings for 2010:

• Over 50% of FSC certificate holders are in the paper industry.
• The majority of respondents sell FSC pure products, followed by mixed and then recycled.
• Fewer than one in eight FSC CoC certified and forest management certified companies also sell non-certified wood products.
• Just under half of respondents reported difficulties getting enough FSC-certified material, with 20% of primary processors and sawmills experiencing ‘major’ difficulties.
• A total of 89.3% of respondents said they are satisfied with their FSC certification and want to maintain it. 10.2% are unsure and 0.5% stated they will not maintain their FSC certificate. This indicates a high degree of satisfaction amongst FSC certificate holders.
• 93.1% of respondents agreed that the FSC is a credible organisation, and 91.8% that it has a leadership role in responsible forest management.
• A clear majority (62%) stated they first sought the FSC Mark in response to customer demands, 26.3% cited commitment to forest management, 13.2% cited the marketing opportunity afforded by association with sustainable forest certification and 13.1% cited CSR policy as their reason for joining FSC.
• 76.7% said they had not considered an alternative forest management or timber certification scheme. 16.6% stated they had considered PEFC and 7% had considered the Sustainable Forestry Initiative (SFI).
• 76.3% said they use the FSC logo for marketing purposes, with 73.1% displaying it on pack, 65.1% mentioning it on their website and 54.7% mentioning it in a printed advertisement.
• Economic reasons were cited as the chief reason for seeking FSC CoC certification (78%), followed by environmental reasons (57.1%), followed by reputational reasons (23.5%) again showing the marketing value of the FSC brand.

Read full survey results on the FSC website

Related articles

Fairtrade most widely recognised ethical label globally

ForestEthics vs Sustainable Forestry Initiative: one year on

Read the full Guardian article 'How green is your coffee?' 

Sustainability was the theme of this year’s Fairtrade Foundation Commercial Conference. It considered what businesses and fairtrade organisations need to do evolve to meet the challenges of food security and climate change – as well as to grow their fairtrade business.

The Fairtrade Foundation’s deputy executive director Mike Gidney presented some interesting data from a recently commissioned Globescan report which revealed that 75% of consumers in the UK said they were more likely to buy a branded product carrying the Fairtrade Certified Mark. The report also showed that the Fairtrade label enjoys more ‘trust’ amongst consumers than the Rainforest Alliance Certified Logo and Soil Association certification.

However, another speaker pointed out that the 75% statistic bears little resemblance to the market reality, where Fairtrade-certified products in the UK only claim a small share of around 3%. A figure of between 30-40% was quoted for the number of potential ethical consumers in the country, but who for various reasons do not yet express their ethics in their purchasing habits. And it was agreed that while the Fairtrade Foundation had done admirable work in raising brand awareness for the Fairtrade Label a lot more needed to be done by the Foundation, fair trade organisations and businesses to engage and convert these consumers. In much the same way recycling has become mainstream in recent years, making buying fairtrade ‘normal’ is the biggest goal for all concerned. This means making it as easy as possible for consumers to access affordable fairtrade goods. 

Promising figures came from Nick Bunker, President of Kraft Foods in the UK and Ireland, who revealed that his company has seen a surge in sales for Cadbury’s Fairtrade Dairy Milk since its Fairtrade certification (500 million bars sold since the Fairtrade chocolate launched). 

Ashish Deo, Commercial Director of the Fairtrade Foundation gave a presentation on the Foundation’s performance over the last year and its plans for the future. He said they expected double-digit growth in 2011 and were preparing to launch Fairtrade shrimp in 2012, as well as looking at blended fabrics made using fairtrade cotton. 

Difficult questions about Fair Trade USA and Fairtrade Labelling Organisation’s split were also raised at this year’s Fairtrade conference. 

The full implications of the split are yet to be understood as the two organisations will not be officially parting company until the New Year – and much has to be done to ensure the best transition for fair trade producers and businesses. 

The Fairtrade Foundation Commercial Conference took place in London on 5 October.

In September 2011 the United Nations held its first International Congress on Ethics and Tourism. The event brought together more than 450 high-profile tourism officials, business leaders, international organisations and experts in Madrid, Spain, to discuss how to guarantee sustainable tourism as well as its role in poverty reduction, gender equality, and fighting exploitation in both the public and private sectors.

In September 2011 the United Nations held its first International Congress on Ethics and Tourism. The event brought together more than 450 high-profile tourism officials, business leaders, international organisations and experts in Madrid, Spain, to discuss how to guarantee sustainable tourism as well as its role in poverty reduction, gender equality, and fighting exploitation in both the public and private sectors.

As part of the event, 14 prominent Spanish tourism businesses have signed up to follow the Global Code of Ethics for Tourism, a set of principles backed by the UN World Tourism Organization (UNWTO). The Code is designed to guide the development of tourism in a way that maximizes the socio-economic benefits of the sector, while minimizing any negative impacts.  While the ten-point Code was adopted in 1999 by the UNWTO General Assembly and endorsed by the United Nations General Assembly in 2001, the additional pledge from high-profile tourism leaders in Spain this month should encourage others in the tourism industry to follow suit.

The majority of the companies in attendance at the Congress also signed the Code of Conduct for the Protection of Children from Sexual Exploitation in Travel and Tourism, committing themselves to concrete measures to protect children. The code was founded by ECPAT International, a global network for the elimination of child prostitution, child pornography and child trafficking for sexual purposes, and is funded by the United Nations Children Fund (UNICEF) and supported by UNWTO.

Meanwhile in South Africa, the Minister of Tourism, Marthinus van Schalkwyk, has just launched the South African National Minimum Standards for Responsible Tourism (NMSRT), which aims to promote sustainability and responsible tourism in the tourism sector, while reducing undesirable impact.

The standard will be used by tourism organisations to create awareness of responsible tourism among their members. It can also be used by tourism businesses and organisations preparing for certification or simply evaluating their organisations' progress in respect of sustainability.

We may well see a range of similar region and international initiatives come on stream in the coming months as the issue of sustainable, responsible tourism continues to gain a higher media profile. 

Check out Ekobai’s list of the main standards relevant to the responsible tourism, hospitality and events industries. 

The appearance of stories about how sustainability standards impact markets in the major business news media is always interesting to ekobai.com and our readers whose markets are impacted.  We highlight two such reportings, in the Financial Times and in CNN.

• In the piece entitled The Dark Side of Chocolate, CNN’s Freedom Project “Ending Modern Day Slavery” advises consumers to purchase Fairtrade or other reliably certified products if they want to be sure the chocolate they are consuming does not have child and slave labour in its history.

• Meanwhile, the Financial Times reports  on a palm oil producer once black listed but now back on track partially with the aid of certification from the Roundtable on Sustainable Palm Oil.   The FT story notes that pressure from environmentalists, while not hurting Golden Agri, Indonesia’s largest palm producer, financially, it did prompt it to seek the standard.

In a joint statement this week with Fairtrade International, Fair Trade USA has announced its intention to resign its membership from Fairtrade International (also known as the Fairtrade Labelling Organisation or FLO) effective from 31 December 2011. Fair Trade USA has announced that it wants to pursue its own approach under the banner of the ‘Fair Trade For All Initiative’. 

This will have implications for US-based Fairtrade licensees and importers as well as those whose supply chain includes US-based traders. As of January 2012 Fair Trade USA will no longer act as the official US member of Fairtrade International, certifying to internationally agreed Fairtrade Standards. 

In a statement Fairtrade International have said:

“While we are committed to supporting businesses to remain within the global Fairtrade system, from 1 June 2012, we will no longer be able to accept FTUSA’s certification for sales into other Fairtrade markets under the global Certification Mark. In order to maintain the integrity of a global system, we will need companies to register with an approved member organisation. In the immediate term, the easiest way to do this will be either directly with Fairtrade International, or through one of our member organisations such as Fairtrade Canada. (We will be talking to US based organisations and businesses to identify the best solution for a longer term structure of support.)”

There will be no application fee for any US businesses currently registered with Fair Trade USA. Fair Trade USA will continue to license its black and white FTUSA label to interested US companies.

What this means for the Fair Trade market

From 1 January 2012, Fair Trade USA will be operating its own approach to the certification of Fair Trade products, however it will continue to recognise producer organisations who hold Fairtrade certification from FLO-CERT.  

The ‘Fair Trade For All Initiative’ ambitiously describes itself as ‘an innovation strategy that will double US sales for Fair Trade producers by 2015’.

The Initiative identifies what it calls the 'systematic exclusion' of coffee, sugar and cocoa farmers from the full benefits of the fairtrade system as applied to tea, flowers and bananas. It says this exclusion occurs because in coffee in particular, Fair Trade is available only to cooperative organisations which represent just 8% of the world's coffee growing community. It states that it will adapt existing international Fair Trade standards from tea, bananas and flowers, and "apply them first to coffee and then to additional categories over time."

This effectively means creating a new standard for these commodities, which will be piloted in coffee producing regions following a full feasibility study. In theory opening up Fair Trade to 'excluded', unorganised coffee farmers and plantations could hugely increase the amount of ethically certified coffee, and subsequently the other named commodities, on the market.

If this announcement affects your business contact Fairtrade Canada at license@fairtrade.ca or contact Fairtrade International at licence@fairtrade.net for advice and assistance. 

Find out more about the new Fair Trade For All Initiative 

Read Fairtrade International CEO Rob Cameron’s Open Letter about these changes to the Fairtrade system.

What this space for further updates in the coming weeks. 

IFOAM  stands for the International Federation of Organic Agricultural Movements and is the Bonn, Germany based non governmental organization established in 1972 when the President of the French farmers' organization, Nature et Progrès conceived of a worldwide appeal to “come together to ensure a future for organic agriculture”.  Now in its 35^th year, IFOAM is the leading umbrella organization uniting the world’s diverse and multifaceted organic movement.   The movement and organic certification in particular can trace its roots back fifty years or more and developed in parallel in several countries, resulting in the current system of more than 100 national, regional and local organic standards in operation around the world.  In addition the use of the word “organic” in marketing requires adherence to specific governmental regulations – the details of which differ between key markets such as the US, the EU, Japan and China. 

A key objective of IFOAM is to try to bring together both the private sector organic standards in operation around the world and also encourage mutual recognition by the various organic regulatory systems.  The mission in this is to make international trade in organic products easier while maintaining the integrity of the movement.  IFOAM has thus initiated four initiatives towards this aim of unifying the complex world of organic standards.

• The IFOAM Family of Standards is a program that accepts existing organic standards and regulatory systems as “equivalent” and therefore should be mutually recognized in each other’s markets.  The list currently includes the regulatory systems of the EU, Japan, the US and Canada.  While these systems do not at present mutually recognize each other, IFOAM is engaged, partially via the Family of Standards program in attempting to bring the parties together with this goal in mind.  The group also includes more than 20 private sector organic standards such Australia’s NASSA. 

• The Community of Best Practices Standard is a programme for individual standards bodies to claim they have achieved assessment against IFOAM’s best practice benchmark. 

• The Global Organic Mark is IFOAM’s own branded logo and can be used by any company producing or dealing with products certified to one of the standards or norms in the IFOAM Family of Standards.  The aspiration here is to make it easier for buyers and consumers to identify with a single logo or brand, worldwide, when making organic choices.  IFOAM however recognizes leading organic brands such as the UK’s Soil Association are well established in their national markets and are unlikely to forego this for a new logo/brand.

• The IFOAM Standard is an off the shelf standard maintained by IFOAM which can be adopted by a certifier, country or sector who may need to build a system from scratch in a short space of time.  IFOAM also provides accreditation services to certifiers against IFOAM norms. 

In commentary, IFOAM certainly represents the leading organisation uniting the organic certification movement on a global level.  Of key importance are their efforts, through the Family of Standards effort in breaking down regulatory and market barriers due to equivalent but different systems in different countries no recognizing each other.  IFOAM’s goal, for example, is to make it possible for an exporter of organic cashew nuts from Tanzania who has demonstrated compliance in selling organic to the EU, to be able to use this in selling to the US.  It is clear that buyers in both the EU and the US would welcome the removal of such barriers as of course would the Tanzanian exporter.  It is also clear that the removal of such barriers (while protecting the integrity of the organic claims) would greatly expand international organic trade.  

It should also be stressed that in certain cases, organic suppliers and buyers are not targeting global trade, but regard “buy local” as a concept hand-in-hand with the organic one.   Thus a sub-group of organic consumers may, for example, be highly concerned about the carbon footprint of what they buy and also may wish to support local producers.  So there will always be room for local organic systems and standards, relating to for example, milk production.  Where local organic produce is not available or feasible, representing a huge range of produce from coffee, tea, nuts, many fresh fruits and cotton for example, global trade is necessary and the minimizing of costs associated with certification to multiple standards and norms would be a welcome move.

In July we reported on the European Outdoor Group and Outdoor Industry Association’s pioneering new ‘Eco Index’ environmental assessment tool for the outdoor industry. 

Now, as the project enters its next phase, apparel companies are being invited to trial the latest version which will help them benchmark and measure the sustainability of their products.

The new 'Apparel Tool' uses the Eco Index framework and original content (piloted in the second half of 2010) as its foundation, and also incorporates Nike's Materials Assessment Tool – to help product designers and developers make data-driven material sourcing choices to reduce environmental impact. 

The Apparel Tool pilot programme will run until January 2012, and participating companies are asked to trial a minimum of two products.