The false promise of certification

The report assesses voluntary sustainability certifications in fisheries, palm oil, and textiles, concluding that many schemes act as 'greenwash' and fail to prevent deforestation, overfishing, or pollution. It argues that the proliferation of labels creates consumer confusion and a 'race to the bottom' in standards. The authors call for the abolition of ineffective schemes and a transition toward science-based, transparent, and holistic regulations that cover the entire product life-cycle.

• Certification schemes in the fisheries sector, specifically the Marine Stewardship Council (MSC) and Friend of the Sea (FOS), have certified fisheries as sustainable despite evidence of overfishing, high by-catch levels, and conflicts with national laws. The MSC is specifically noted for a 'compartmentalised' approach where vessels may be certified for one species while using the same equipment to catch protected species unsustainably.
• No investigated palm oil certification scheme has effectively slowed deforestation, peatland draining, or biodiversity loss. The Roundtable on Sustainable Palm Oil (RSPO), while often viewed as the best, allows peatland draining and secondary forest conversion. Government-led schemes in Indonesia (ISPO) and Malaysia (MSPO) are described as a 'race to the bottom' because they only require compliance with weak national legislation.
• In the textile industry, there is no overarching scheme that satisfactorily addresses sustainability across the entire supply chain. The Higg Index is criticised for its reliance on self-assessment and lack of transparency. In the cotton sector, the Better Cotton Initiative (BCI) is found to have grown at the expense of organic cotton by allowing the use of genetically modified seeds and toxic chemicals.
• The report concludes that the 'flood' of certification creates consumer confusion and allows companies to use labels as a cover to deflect criticism. It argues that certification can cause active damage by lowering standards to increase certified volumes and failing to enforce transparency.
• The authors propose four principles for reforming certification: transparency in criteria and performance reporting; independence to remove conflicts of interest; a holistic approach with high traceability across the product life-cycle; and a commitment to continuous, science-based improvements.

APA

Changing Markets Foundation (2018). The false promise of certification. https://changingmarkets.org/wp-content/uploads/2023/10/FALSE-PROMISE-EXEC-SUM-ENG.pdf

Chicago

Changing Markets Foundation. The false promise of certification. 2018. https://changingmarkets.org/wp-content/uploads/2023/10/FALSE-PROMISE-EXEC-SUM-ENG.pdf.

Wikipedia

{{cite report |author=Changing Markets Foundation |title=The false promise of certification |date=May 2018 |url=https://changingmarkets.org/wp-content/uploads/2023/10/FALSE-PROMISE-EXEC-SUM-ENG.pdf |access-date=23 October 2026 |via=Climate Insights Directory}}

BibTeX

@techreport{changingmarketsfoundation2018false, author = {{Changing Markets Foundation}}, title = {{The false promise of certification}}, institution = {Changing Markets Foundation}, year = {2018}, month = may, url = {https://changingmarkets.org/wp-content/uploads/2023/10/FALSE-PROMISE-EXEC-SUM-ENG.pdf}, urldate = {2026-10-23}, note = {Indexed by Climate Insights Directory} }