ENVIRONMENTAL CLAIMS ON PACKAGING: A DAILY STRUGGLE

 

1-  Why this permanent committee within the CNE?

The “environmental” pressure exerted by the public authorities, by NGOs and by the media following the Grenelle de l’environnement has only increased year after year. One of the unfortunate consequences is that various marketers and packaging manufacturers have sometimes been tempted to use product packaging to “greenwash” their products and packaging, either unconsciously through ignorance of the subject, or voluntarily.

In 2013, we felt it was important for the CNE, a recognized moral authority in the packaging value chain, to take up this issue so that environmental claims about packaging remain fair and proportionate to consumers. In the absence of emerging regulations that are not always clear, the CNE has the legitimacy to educate and set limits.

Our committee issues opinions based on a document available free of charge on our website in French and English. This document has been recently updated.

2-  What are the results of this committee?

In the space of ten years, this committee has met under the leadership of our General Delegate 28 times, meetings punctuated by as many minutes distributed to all members of the CNE.

48 letters, emails or other interventions were decided during these meetings. As a result of these opinions, 30 allegations that appeared to be out of bounds were removed or modified. This makes a total of 62% positive result. I am delighted that the CNE was able to achieve this result even though we have no official “police” power in this area.

I would like to take this opportunity to thank Bruno Siri for his constant and strong involvement, as well as all the representatives of the CNE’s colleges who have participated very assiduously in the meetings of this committee.

3-  How do you see the future of this committee?

First of all, we will continue to actively support this committee. The packaging value chain must be irreproachable and the work of this committee contributes greatly to the moral authority of the CNE.

That being said, it is important to understand that the “environmental” pressure is growing and that new words, new expressions and new labels are appearing every day.

Two practical examples to illustrate my point:

1. In 2013, we wrote that it was undesirable for the possible “biodegradable” quality of a package to be claimed because it could encourage the final consumer to throw his empty package in nature instead of putting it in the appropriate recycling circuit. Different stakeholders criticized us at the time, but since then, the law indicates that the term “biodegradable” should no longer be used by a packaging.
2. For the past three years, the term “responsible” has been used as a qualifier on some packaging. We would like to point out to the user that only a natural or legal person can be responsible. Certainly not an object, a product or a package. Some others use the expression “responsible approach”. The legislator has not yet spoken and we will know later if such words or expressions can be used to qualify products and their packaging, but for the time being we maintain our position.

This is to show that our compass remains and will remain to provide the final consumer with claims that are fair and proportionate and above all useful.

The CNE remains fully available to study with marketers and packagers the claims not yet listed that they would like to use.

What do you do with the 38% of “offenders”?

First of all, it should be noted that the last notices sent at the end of 2022 have not yet been answered and therefore, with time, the percentage of “victories” will increase a little following the systematic reminders that we send out.

Then you saw with the second example that in the absence of a precise reference system, we are sometimes in an undecided semantic battle.

But your question remains very relevant for a certain number of “offenders” who assert obvious untruths, for example a plastic bottle not made of fossil material qualified as “plastic-free”. The CNE will look at what other actions we can take to ensure that these types of misleading environmental claims disappear.