Purpose Material efficiency encompasses a range of strategies that support a reduction of material consumption and waste production from a product's life cycle perspective and which can help the transition towards...
详细信息
Purpose Material efficiency encompasses a range of strategies that support a reduction of material consumption and waste production from a product's life cycle perspective and which can help the transition towards a circular economy. The aim of this paper is to analyse the state of implementation of material efficiency requirements for products as set out in existing eu ecolabel criteria, consider possible improvements, identify current limitations and describe potential or existing synergies with other eu policies and initiatives. Methods Key concepts related to material efficiency have been provided and classified into three groups which are, in order of decreasing priority: reduction, reuse, and recycling/recovery. This classification system has then been used for the analysis of existing requirements set out for different eu ecolabel products. This includes a description of potential environmental benefits, trade-offs, market barriers and risks. Material efficiency concepts have then been cross-checked with other eu policies and initiatives. Results and discussion Looking at eu ecolabel criteria for 26 different product groups revealed a broad range of material efficiency aspects, some of which are influenced by the nature of the product group itself. Some material efficiency aspects were broadly integrated into eu ecolabel criteria through complementary strategies (e.g. design for durability, recyclability, availability of spare parts, reversible disassembly and provision of information). However, ways to implement additional material efficiency requirements (e.g. minimum lifetime of products) should be sought further. A symbiotic relationship can exist between the eu ecolabel and many policy tools in the sense that regulatory and standardisation frameworks can offer a robust basis for justifying the integration of material efficiency aspects in the eu ecolabel, while the eu ecolabel can explore and promote approaches targeted at front runners in material effic
The eu Commission ecolabel and the Product and Environmental Footprint (PEF) aim at promoting the development and consumption of greener products. The product aquatic toxicity score from these 2 methods may lead in so...
详细信息
The eu Commission ecolabel and the Product and Environmental Footprint (PEF) aim at promoting the development and consumption of greener products. The product aquatic toxicity score from these 2 methods may lead in some circumstances to opposite conclusions. Although this could be interpreted as an inconsistency, the score should not be compared to each other but used in a complementary way. In short, CDV provided a "full" product formula aquatic toxicity score, even if some chemicals may never reach or persist in freshwater ecosystems. The USEtox (R) score, by integrating fate and exposure, focuses on the potential toxicity of persistent-water-soluble chemicals at steady state. Since no risk or safety assessment can be conducted with USEtox (R) nor with the CDV, both are a hazard-based scoring system. This short communication clarifies the difference between approaches underpinning the toxicity scores used in ecolabel and PEF, providing guidance on how to interpret the results.
One category of voluntary approaches to environmental governance is ecolabels used to nudge consumers towards purchasing environmentally friendly products. The purpose of this article is to critically review the trade...
详细信息
One category of voluntary approaches to environmental governance is ecolabels used to nudge consumers towards purchasing environmentally friendly products. The purpose of this article is to critically review the trade law implications of voluntary ecolabels, with special reference to the eu ecolabel. For a long time, the lack of trade disputes related to the Agreement on Technical Barriers to Trade (TBT Agreement) before the World Trade Organization Dispute Settlement Body rendered research on the legality of voluntary ecolabels in trade law unavoidably speculative. Consequently, the existing scholarship has failed to inform the environment law community clearly how trade law views voluntary ecolabels. This article aims to fill the gap in the literature by evaluating the consistency of the eu ecolabel with the TBT rules. The article concludes that it is highly unlikely that the eu ecolabel may be found inconsistent with the TBT Agreement. Nevertheless, there remains some legal risks.
Purpose USEtox (TM) (Rosenbaum et al. 2008) is a new model which can be used to calculate characterization factors for human and ecotoxicity impact categories used in life cycle assessment. The French ADEME-AFNOR (htt...
详细信息
Purpose USEtox (TM) (Rosenbaum et al. 2008) is a new model which can be used to calculate characterization factors for human and ecotoxicity impact categories used in life cycle assessment. The French ADEME-AFNOR (http://***/) is currently considering this model to develop a new environmental labelling standard for consumer goods. The objective of this short study is to compare USEtox (TM) impact scores with critical dilution volume (CDV) scores from the european ecolabel (http://***/environment/ecolabel), a well-established tool widely used in europe aiming at discriminating environmental friendly products. Material and methods The same range of chemicals (high scores to low scores) listed in both the USEtox (TM) database and the eu ecolabel detergent ingredient database (DID-list) were used for the comparison. The DID-list is a reference list, which contains agreed and verified fate and ecotoxicity data. The ranking was made based on two different ranking parameters, one from each model: the environmental impact score from USEtox (TM) and the CDV from the eu ecolabel. Additionally, a Spearman's rank correlation (rho) coefficient was calculated. Results and discussion Sixty-nine chemicals common in personal care and cleaning products were selected for the comparison between USEtox (TM) and eu ecolabel methods. A "fair" agreement was found between the two models with a Spearman correlation coefficient rho of 0.74, but a significant number of chemicals was ranked rather differently. The presence of outliers (i.e., different ranking) may be explained by several factors, which include the use of discrete versus continuous values to estimate the substance's degradation constant. Another factor could be that the substances are grouped under classes in the DID-list, thus having average parameter values. The main factor though probably lays in the different sources of the physico-chemical, fate and ecotoxicity data within the two mo
暂无评论