2

Types of Certification Labels

ISO (The International Organization for Standardisation) oversees standard setting for green building products. It has independent, non-governmental status
and develops standards with the aim of facilitating trade.

However, although there are three types of global ISO standards for green products, their application is not universally applied or necessarily used by green
product certifiers. Geography and politics also play a role. For example, Type III are rarely seen in the U.S. but in Europe they are increasingly common.

Consider, that there are also significant differences between the three:

ISO 14024 multi- attribute Type I labels

Is a voluntary seal of approval. It provides simple but accurate information on the life cycle of a product, which must be verified independently.

Information is provided on the combined impacts of the product throughout its useful life, including manufacture. This is done in a way that is easily
interpreted by the consumer.

An example is the European ECOLABEL. It indicates that the product has been manufactured in a way that minimizes the use of hazardous chemicals and raw
materials and guarantees energy efficiency. It also informs the consumer about the most appropriate way to use and dispose of the product.

ISO 14021 single-attribute Type II labels

Type II labels inform about single environmental claims, such as the recycled content of the product. This declaration can be made by the manufacturers,
without the need for external verification.

Therefore, their credibility is compromised, as the consumer must trust the data provided by the manufacturer or service provider. Gaining third-party
verification is one method used to overcome this problem.

Specific symbols are not defined for each of the environmental aspects, making them difficult for consumers to understand.

ISO 14025 comprehensive disclosure Type III labels

Comprehensive disclosure labels conforming to ISO 14025 are known as EPDs, or Environmental Product Declarations. They can read more like a report than
a label because they provide significantly more detail. As such, they are generally not read by consumers, which is a shame because they are far more
rigorous.

These labels are mainly voluntary, but the information is independently verified, so there is far less chance they will include selective or misleading claims
compared to Type II.

Information is broken down into impact categories such as resource consumption, eutrophication, emissions, and generation of waste. The content and format
are determined by what is known as Product Category Rules (PCR).

PCRs set out the life cycle analysis parameters and determine the environmental indicators for groups of products (e.g. wood stains). Each rule is specific to
each system or product category.

Within this group, there are some mandatory labels. The best-known is the European energy label, which designates energy efficiency in household appliances,
vehicles, and buildings. Ratings go from D (the least efficient) to A+++ (the most efficient).

Third-Party Labels
Green building products can be first, second, or third-party certified. This distinction is important because only one of them is independently verified. That one
of course, is third-party.

 First-party certification is carried out by the manufacturer of the product, so risks bias. It is a form of self-declaration which might include unverified
claims and ‘greenwashing’.
 Second-party certification lies in the middle. It involves an external body in the verification process, but still includes elements of self-reporting and
self-evaluation. A fee may also be involved, so raises similar questions of trust.
Page 2
 3

 Third-party certification is the most rigorous and the least prone to bias because the entire process is carried out externally. The body undertaking
the certification only receives a fee for the assessment, so the process is designed to be impartial.

The third-party carries out product testing and validates that the product meets certain industry-independent standards. This makes it more likely that marketing
claims will accurately reflect the environmental impact of the product.

Review of Green Product Certifications

Green product certifications are becoming more common in construction because they are increasingly used within building rating systems such as LEED.
Below are some of these certifications as well as some useful information on how they operate.

Cradle to Cradle
Cradle to Cradle CertifiedCM products include building materials, textiles, homecare products, toys, fabrics, and packaging. A full list of their certified products,
including for construction, can be found at C2Certified.org.

As the name suggests, certification is based on the idea of a circular economy, so products are evaluated on their performance across the categories in the
circular economy model, including social equality.

The Standards set by Cradle to Cradle are created through a multi-party engagement process which is said to include the public.

Product assessment is multi-attribute and third-party. However, the body overseeing assessment receives training by the Cradle to Cradle Products
Innovation Institute. Certification follows the standards set in ISO 14025.

A product receives an achievement level for each category — Basic, Bronze, Silver, Gold, or Platinum in the categories of material health, material reutilization,
renewable energy and carbon management, water stewardship, and social fairness.

Material health and material reutilization are especially relevant to construction, for example they relate directly to LEED’s key area of material selection.

One of the advantages of Cradle to Cradle is that for a product to achieve top Platinum status, it must score highly in every category. It is difficult to achieve, so
only recently did building materials manage to achieve this status.

The disadvantage of Cradle to Cradle is that it is not based on a life cycle approach, so does not consider the energy use of a product during its lifetime. For
this reason, there are studies which suggest that it is not always an appropriate strategy to distinguish environmentally preferable products.

Page 3