Industry to Unveil Its Idea of ‘Green’ Marketing Rules

Weighing in with industry’s recommendations for the fair use of such much disputed terms as “recycled,” “biodegradable” and “compostable,” a coalition of consumer product manufacturers and packagers will propose nationwide guidelines today to the Federal Trade Commission.

Industry groups have sought to head off a proliferation of state and local laws--California’s were the first, signed into law last September--sprouting in the absence of federal regulation.

Varying rules, they fear, will bring more confusion to the so-called green-marketing scene and make it hard for nationally marketed brands to comply with varying state standards.

“If they have different label laws in every state, and even some localities, it means basically that we can’t tell consumers about the environmental features of our products,” said Melinda Sweet, director of environmental affairs for Lever Bros., maker of such products as Aim toothpaste, Caress and Dove soap and Wisk detergent.

The industry proposal includes guidelines for claims that a product is made from recycled material, that it can be composted, that it was manufactured in a way that wastes less material than similar products and that a package can be reused or refilled.

The coalition also proposed general guidelines for the use of such terms as “environmentally friendly,” “green” and “environmentally safe.”

The few environmentalists who had seen drafts of the proposal expressed reservations Wednesday. “It’s a very mixed bag,” said Jeanne Wirka, solid waste policy analyst with Environmental Action, a Washington-based group.

Wirka and others particularly questioned the examples used by the industry coalition to explain its broad recommendations, saying they often contradicted or watered down the effect of the proposed rules.

Environmentalists and consumer activists generally support consistent federal standards, but they worry that the rules may be written too loosely.

They have been suspicious, too, of industry’s calls for federal rules, since these could curtail what they see as innovative state and local efforts to bring some sense to environmental marketing.

“The crunch really comes down” to how toughly these terms are defined, said Norman L. Dean, executive director of Green Seal, an environmentalist- and consumer-sponsored group in Washington that plans to release its own labels of approval on consumer goods beginning this year.

Dean said he expects to see most labeling regulation develop at the state level. “Someone once referred to the states as the laboratory of democracy,” Dean said, “and I think in (many environmental areas) that has definitely been the case.”

As the controversy has grown, the FTC--working with the Environmental Protection Agency and the White House Office of Consumer Affairs--has been considering whether to issue national guidelines, and, if so, what the guidelines would be. The new proposal represents industry’s input to that process.

“This is one more piece of that puzzle,” Lee Peeler, associate director for advertising practices at the FTC, said Wednesday. “I think people have sort of been waiting for the petition.”

FTC guidelines do not have the force of law, though they are widely followed by industry.

Peeler also expects proposals from a task force of state attorneys general that has been meeting to draw up its own proposed rules. Environmental, consumer and industry representatives have testified at two public hearings held by that group, including a December hearing in San Diego.

The industry proposal is endorsed by the National Food Processors Assn. and 33 other trade groups, including the Council on Solid Waste Solutions, a plastics trade group; the American Paper Institute; the Council on Plastic Packaging and the Environment; the Flexible Packaging Institute and the Soap and Detergent Assn.

Unlike the attorneys general, the industry coalition did not consult with its environmental and consumer opponents.

“It was our thought that since industry has to live and die by these guidelines that we would be the creators and that the FTC would consult with the EPA and others afterwards,” said Sweet, the Lever Bros. official.

INDUSTRY’S PLAN FOR ‘GREEN’ LABELING A coalition of consumer product makers and packagers has drafted rules for labeling supposedly environment-conscious products. The proposal is in the form of guidelines and illustrative examples. Some excerpts:

Rule: It is deceptive to represent, directly or by implication, that a product or package contains recycled material unless there is a reasonable basis to believe that all material being claimed as part of the “recycled” content otherwise would have entered the solid waste stream.

Example: A manufacturer produces a product made of flexible plastic. Scraps from the production line are diverted to a separate line in the plant, where they are incorporated into the production of a rigid plastic container with equal amounts of virgin material. A claim that the rigid plastic container contains “at least 50% recycled plastic” is not deceptive if, without the diversion, the waste material from the first process would have entered the solid waste stream.

Rule: It is deceptive to misrepresent, directly or by implication, the feasibility of recycling a product or packaging material.

Example: A bottle bears the unqualified statement that it is “recyclable.” The material in question is recycled in some parts of the country. The claim might nevertheless be deceptive if consumers understand the reference to mean that recycling facilities for the material are more widely available than is actually the case. Marketers should exercise caution before using such unqualified claims for a material.

Source: National Food Processors Assn.