Greenwashing Tactic #4: Fake Labels

Original tweet

[Tweet above by Ruben Brunsveld now deleted] https://twitter.com/RubenBrunsveld/status/1448552977665507330?s=20

“No voluntary standards or industry schemes have done the job fully [of eliminating deforestation or human rights abuses]. That is why the game-changing EU CSDDD [Corporate Sustainability Due Diligence Directive] is mandatory. Certification is a useful tool but will not liberate the company from its duty of due diligence”

~ Heidi Hautala, Vice-President of the European Parliament and part of the the Human Rights and Democracy panel and Eco-Management and Audit Scheme (EMAS)

“While RSPO is often referred to as the best scheme in the sector, it
has several shortcomings; most notably, it allows the conversion of secondary forests and the draining
of peatlands, it has not prevented human rights violations and it does not require GHG emissions
reductions.

“In light of this, we call for action to reduce demand for palm oil, such as
ditching biofuels targets, as well as channelling new plantations into non-forested areas by putting in
place a strong moratorium on palm oil expansion to forests and peatlands. Most schemes in this sector
should be abolished in light of their failures on multiple fronts.”

— The False Promise of Certification (2018) Changing Markets

“Rather than transforming the underlying conditions or practices that lead to abuse, Multi-Stakeholder Initiatives (MSI’s) risk embedding certain business-as-usual practices and creating a misperception that they are effectively addressing human rights concerns when they are not.

MSI Insight Report on Standards and Scope for Multi-Stakeholder Initiatives (MSIs) like the RSPO

“Both Roundtable on Sustainable Palm Oil (RSPO) and Indonesian Sustainable Palm Oil (ISPO) schemes are failing to ensure that palm oil is being produced and traded legally, let alone sustainably. They cannot be relied upon by overseas consumers concerned about their role in the global chain that leads to deforestation.”

Deceased Estate: Illegal palm oil wiping out Indonesia’s national forest, Greenpeace Indonesia, Oct 2021

Instead of guaranteeing that deforestation and other harms are excluded from supply chains, certification with inadequate governance, standards and/or enforcement enables destructive businesses to continue operating as usual.

More broadly, by improving the image of forest and ecosystem risk commodities and so stimulating demand, certification risks actually increasing the harm caused by the expansion of commodity production.

Instead of being an effective forest protection tool, certification schemes thus end up greenwashing products linked to deforestation, ecosystem destruction and rights abuses.

Destruction Certified, Greenpeace 2021.

RSPO’s complaint procedures are lengthy and ineffective; the high incidence of substandard audits (up to 60%) indicates a lack of quality control in the system. Even if complaints are brought to the complaints mechanism, the RSPO member can decide to leave the RPSO scheme without negative con- sequences. This could disincentivize the RSPO scheme from sanctioning members over complaints in order to minimize its risk of losing members.

In some cases, the same auditors investigated complaints against companies that they had previously audited themselves. This represents a clear conflict of interest and therefore compromises the complaints mechanism.

There is also a lack of transparency in the awarding of contracts, certification processes, audit reports or the withdrawal of a contract or certification or accreditation. This lack of transparency largely shields the actors from scrutiny by civil society.

“The RSPO complaints system receives and resolves few cases. Out of 64 RSPO member companies, only 17 grievances were reported and only 3 resolved”

‘Lack of resolution mechanisms allow palm oil conflicts to fester in Indonesia‘, Hans Nicholas Jong, Mongabay, 29 November, 2021

EIA: Burning Questions, the Credibility of Sustainable Palm Oil Still Elusive

RSPO members continue to be exposed for violations of the body’s own standard and this ongoing trend makes the RSPO’s claims of sustainability unreliable.

We identified 64 conflicts that involved RSPO member companies, of which 17 prompted communities to convey their grievances to the RSPO’s conflict resolution mechanism…We conclude that—on all counts—the conflict resolution mechanism is biased in favor of companies. The result of these biases is that the actual capacity of the RSPO’s mechanism to provide a meaningful remedy for rural communities’ grievances remains very limited. This unequal access to justice sustains conflicts between companies and communities over land.

Afrizal, A., Hospes, O., Berenschot, W. et al. Unequal access to justice: an evaluation of RSPO’s capacity to resolve palm oil conflicts in Indonesia. Agric Hum Values 40, 291–304 (2023). https://doi.org/10.1007/s10460-022-10360-z

Certification schemes too weak to uphold the European Union Deforestation Regulation

[Voluntary Sustainability Standards] fell short in providing a comprehensive prohibition of deforestation and forest degradation. They also presented variable coverage of the relevant legislation outlined in the EUDR, as well as deficiencies in their systems to assure compliance with the standards. Overall, this study indicates that VSS schemes can be incorporated as elements of due diligence systems but are insufficient to demonstrate compliance with the EUDR.

Cosimo, L. H. E., Masiero, M., Mammadova, A., & Pettenella, D. (2024). Voluntary sustainability standards to cope with the new European Union regulation on deforestation-free products: A gap analysis. Forest Policy and Economics, 164, 103235. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.forpol.2024.103235

Eco-labels and certifications for agricultural crops have yet to halt land use change. Sparse and uneven market uptake only partially explain this outcome. Loopholes in certification standards and enforcement mechanisms also play a role.

Do eco-labels prevent deforestation? Lessons from non-state market driven governance in the soy, palm oil, and cocoa sectors., (2018) van der Ven, H., Rothacker, C. & Cashore, B. Glob. Environ. Change 52, 141–151.

We find that, while sustainability standards can help improve the sustainability of production processes in certain situations, they are insufficient to ensure food system sustainability at scale, nor do they advance equity objectives in agrifood supply chains.

Sustainability standards in global agrifood supply chains., (2021) Meemken, EM., Barrett, C.B., Michelson, H.C. et al. Nat Food. https://doi.org/10.1038/s43016-021-00360-3

Big brand sustainability, while important, will not on its own resolve the problems of global environmental change. In conclusion, the article highlights the importance of a co-regulatory governance approach that includes stronger state regulations, sustained advocacy, more responsible individual consumerism, and tougher international legal constraints to go beyond the business gains from big brand sustainability to achieve more transformational, ‘absolute’ global environmental progress.

Big brand sustainability: governance prospects and environmental limits. (2012) Dauvergne, P. & Lister, J. Glob. Environ. Change 22, 36–45.

Product packaging cues are a means of communication to consumers. This study reflects on use and effectiveness of sustainability cues on packaging. The conversion of cue recognition to driving purchasing behavior is low.

Sustainability cues on packaging: the influence of recognition on purchasing behavior. (2019) Rees, W., Tremma, O. & Manning, L., J. Clean. Prod. 235, 841–85.

This article argues that the form of sustainability offered by certification schemes such as the RSPO fetishes the commodity palm oil in order to assuage critical consumer initiatives in the North. This technical-managerial solution is part of a larger project: the “post-political” climate politics regime (Swyngedouw) that attempts to “green” the status quo.

Commodifying sustainability: Development, nature and politics in the palm oil industry (2019) World Development
Volume 121, September 2019, Pages 218-228

• The palm oil industry is neither sustainable nor a viable development model.
• Certification represents a technical fix which neglects underlying dynamics of power, class, gender and accumulation.
• The fetishised commodity ‘certified sustainable palm oil’ has no impact on the regional scale of expansion.
• Working conditions in the plantations and mills entrench social inequality and poverty.

From: Commodifying sustainability: Development, nature and politics in the palm oil industry (2019) World Development
Volume 121, September 2019, Pages 218-228