ECOLABELLING: ITS IMPLICATIONS FOR CHINA

The report examines China's ecolabelling program, launched in 1993 and officially operational by May 1994 under the China Certification Committee for Environmental Labelling Products (CCEL). It details the program's voluntary, third-party certification process and its focus on products with significant environmental impacts or those closely related to daily life. While the report finds that foreign ecolabels have not yet caused significant widespread trade disruptions for China, it identifies vulnerabilities in sectors like textiles and footwear, particularly in European markets. The document recommends that China strengthen its program's transparency, adopt life-cycle assessment (LCA) methods, participate in ISO standards-setting, and pursue mutual recognition agreements to mitigate trade barriers and capitalize on the growing global demand for environmentally friendly products.

• China officially launched its environmental labelling program in May 1994 through the China Certification Committee for Environmental Labelling Products (CCEL), a third-party certification agency authorized by the China State Bureau of Technology Supervision (CSBTS).
• As of June 1996, the Chinese program had issued criteria for 12 product categories and awarded labels to 43 products from 23 manufacturers.
• China's ecolabelling criteria generally follow a single-factor or few-factors approach, though pure silk products are assessed using a more comprehensive life-cycle approach.
• While general textile exports from Beijing were not reported as significantly affected by foreign ecolabels, specific exporters like Xiamen Silk Import and Export Corporation have seen declines, partly due to a 1994 German law banning textiles dyed with Azo Dyes.
• China's exports of refrigerators have been impacted by European ecolabelling criteria, forcing manufacturers to obtain European ecolabels to maintain market access.
• The report identifies several challenges for China, including low public awareness of the environmental label and the higher cost of ecolabelled products, such as CFC-free refrigerators which cost 100-300 yuan RMB more than standard models.
• To reduce trade barriers and improve competitiveness, the report recommends that China adopt life-cycle analysis (LCA) in criteria formulation, increase transparency, and participate in the ISO standards-setting process and the Global Ecolabelling Network.

APA

International Institute for Sustainable Development (1996). ECOLABELLING: ITS IMPLICATIONS FOR CHINA. https://www.iisd.org/system/files/publications/EcoChina.pdf

Chicago

International Institute for Sustainable Development. ECOLABELLING: ITS IMPLICATIONS FOR CHINA. 1996. https://www.iisd.org/system/files/publications/EcoChina.pdf.

Wikipedia

{{cite report |author=International Institute for Sustainable Development |title=ECOLABELLING: ITS IMPLICATIONS FOR CHINA |date=1996 |url=https://www.iisd.org/system/files/publications/EcoChina.pdf |access-date=17 August 2026 |via=Climate Insights Directory}}

BibTeX

@techreport{internationalinstituteforsustainabledevelopment1996ecolabelling, author = {{International Institute for Sustainable Development}}, title = {{ECOLABELLING: ITS IMPLICATIONS FOR CHINA}}, institution = {International Institute for Sustainable Development}, year = {1996}, url = {https://www.iisd.org/system/files/publications/EcoChina.pdf}, urldate = {2026-08-17}, note = {Indexed by Climate Insights Directory} }