CMA Environment Claims - Which? response

Summary

Which? welcomes the CMA’s work in this area and the publication of this much-needed draft guidance. We support the focus on misleading, vague or false claims about the sustainability or environmental impact of products and services, and how failure to provide all relevant information about the sustainability of a product or service could mislead consumers and therefore break consumer law. 

We welcome the comprehensive nature of the draft guidance, and agree with the six principles that the CMA has set out. We also have a number of recommendations for how the draft guidance could be further improved, as follows:

• More specific definitions for commonly used terms, complementing any sectoral rules or guidance that already exists. Our research has identified energy and packaging as key sectors where this would be particularly useful.
• More detail on the level of substantiation that would be appropriate for claims.
• Further detail on how the guidance may apply differently to different types of businesses, and where responsibility for compliance lies.
• Greater emphasis on the importance of businesses taking into account research into how consumers will understand and use claims.
• Guidance on how regularly companies will be expected to review comparisons to ensure that these are accurate and up to date.
• We welcome the emphasis that businesses should avoid an over-reliance on qualifying information.
• Given the nature of supply chains, we think that it is appropriate to include business-to-business as well as business-to-consumer relationships. More case studies that illustrate the different format in which claims may appear, including implied claims, as well as further examples of best practice.
• Further clarification on the level of information that would be required at the point of sale so that consumers have the information they need and companies are clear as to how prominent this information should be.
• Greater clarity on misleading by omission and lifecycle impacts as well as greater focus on the accessibility of additional information.
• Clarification of how companies can use different indicators of environmental impact comparatively, including how to avoid false equivalence where different measures are conflated. 

Overall, we strongly welcome action to promote accurate and reliable environmental claims. It is essential that consumers have confidence in the information provided as they try to make more sustainable choices. This should also be beneficial for companies who are making genuine efforts to offer products or services that support environmental goals. However, a careful balance is needed so that the guidance does not dissuade businesses from providing information about the sustainability of products and services that would help consumers to make an informed choice. 

As this is an area with the potential to cause real detriment to consumers who are trying to do the right thing in making greener choices, we urge the CMA to work with the Government and consider where further action needs to be taken in the UK beyond this guidance, including the need for more specific regulation. We also recommend that the CMA includes a strategy for how consumers will be made aware of companies’ obligations in this area as part of its planned compliance campaign.