Eco-labelling and Greenwashing

Eco-labels have the opportunity to effectively inform consumer decision making if they are used properly. Highly reputable eco-labels such as The Fair Trade Alliance, The Forest Stewardship Council (FSC), The Marine Stewardship Council (MSC) and The Canada Organic label, among others are effectively communicate a company's commitment to a specific set of criteria related to sustainability within a particular industry. The dangers associated with eco-labelling are caused by the fact that certifications and labels overall are not regulated. Companies may therefore choose to add an "eco-label" to their product that they themselves created or where the criteria is less stringent than those mentioned above (eg. Dolphin Friendly vs MSC and Sustainable Forest Initiative (SFI) vs FSC). Companies may do this in an effort to win over consumers who are trying to make better purchasing decisions related to sustainability but who are not overly informed of the differences between certifications and labels. In these cases, I would argue that companies are trying to intentionally mislead consumers. Many people have seen the words "healthy", "natural", "non-gmo" or "gluten-free" on items that are not 100% healthy or natural or on products that would never have been genetically modified or contained gluten to start. In these cases, companies are again misleading consumers and using their lack of knowledge or information to the company's advantage. In conclusion, I believe that eco-labels, when properly used, are a highly effective way of communicating sustainability to consumers and informing their decisions. When this occurs the eco-labels benefit both the consumer and the business. However, it is important for people to understand that these labels are not currently regulated and therefore rely on primarily on the well-known labels.