JAK/2020/PI/4b

Good Practices on
Applying Eco-labelling
in Asia and the Pacific
Biosphere Reserves
Good Practices on
Applying Eco-labelling
in Asia and the Pacific
Biosphere Reserves
The designation employed and the presentation of material throughout this publication do not imply the
expression of any opinion whatsoever on the part of UNESCO concerning the legal status of any country, territory,
city or area or of its authorities or concerning the delimination of its frontiers of boundaries. The authors are
responsible for the choice and the presentation of the facts contained in this book and for the opinions expressed
therein, which are not necessarily those of UNESCO and do not commit the Organization.

Good Practices on Applying Eco-labelling in Asia and the Pacific Biosphere Reserves

Adhe L. Wulandari
Fenesia
Trita Katriana

Editor
Lynda A. Mills

Contributors
Ade Bagja Hidayat, Coordinator, Cibodas BR
Barbara Landgraf, Managing Director, Dachmarke Rhön GmbH
Beate Blahy, staff member for public relations, press releases and international affairs, Schorfheide-Chorin BR
Administration
Carolina De León García, Technician of Green Economy Programme, La Palma BR
Kyong-O Moon, Secretary-General, World Heritage Promotion Team of Korean Tidal Flats
Lia Rosenberg, BR Coordinator, West Estonian Archipelago BR
Lê Thanh Tuyên, Secretary, Cat Ba BR
Ronja Krebs, NABU Project Coordinator for BMZ-funded Projects & Deputy Head of Africa Programme (NABU
Project Coordinator for Lake Tana BR)

This publication is a preliminary version and is subject to further update pending feedback from the 12th
Southeast Asia Biosphere Reserve Network (SeaBRnet) meeting, March 2019.

Cover design and layout

Ganni Mulya, UNESCO Office Jakarta

Printed in Manila, March 2019

Preface
This document is part of UNESCO Office Jakarta’s response to a request by national Man and
the Biosphere (MAB) Committees and Biosphere Reserves from across Asia and the Pacific
to provide guidance on the implementation of the Biosphere Reserve concept in Asia and the
Pacific especially for achieving the Sustainable Development Goals.

Three areas have been assigned top priority in this regard: guidance on the management of
Biosphere Reserves as sites for sustainability in action; guidance on the development of eco-
labeling programmes with particular reference to Biosphere Reserves as ecotourism destinations;
and guidance on the legal status of Biosphere Reserves, in particular their zonation.

The document you are about to read – Good Practices on Applying Eco-labelling in Asia and the
Pacific Biosphere Reserves – was developed in full consultation with stakeholders and experts
from BRs in the region. It is one of three documents, each responding to one priority area. Each
document is brief and concise, allowing it to be read where it will make a difference: in the
region’s Biosphere Reserves – by those for whom it was written: Biosphere Reserve managers,
communities, businesses and other stakeholders.

The three documents complement the ongoing process towards the development of Technical
Guidelines for Biosphere Reserves, offering practical examples and guidance drawn from
Biosphere Reserves across region and beyond. While the documents have been designed
specifically for use in Asia and the Pacific, it is my firm belief that MAB and Biosphere Reserve
communities across the world will find them to be of interest.

The development of the three guidelines was made possible through support from Japan
Funds-in-Trust towards the “Biosphere Reserves Interconnected in Diverse Global Environments
for Sustainability in Asia and the Pacific” (BRIDGES) project – representing a continuation of the
steadfast and invaluable support towards regional engagement in UNESCO’s natural sciences
programmes provided by the Government of Japan over the past two decades.

I invite you to share with us your views and suggestions for future improvements of this
document. This will allow us to further develop and improve its contents in future - thereby
enhancing their utility and benefit for the future of MAB in the region. Like the Biosphere Reserve
concept itself, we contribute these documents as part of a dialogue that continuously evolves,
shaped by the communities it serves

Shahbaz Khan
Director and Representative
UNESCO Office Jakarta
March 2019

I
 Table of Contents
PREFACE I

TABLE OF CONTENTS II

LIST OF TABLES III

LIST OF BOXES III

LIST OF FIGURES III

1.0 INTRODUCTION 1

1.1 BACKGROUND 2

1.2 THINGS TO CONSIDER WHEN DEVELOPING BR LABELS 5

2.0 BENEFITS OF APPLYING ECO-LABELS IN BIOSPHERE RESERVES 8

3.0 DEVELOPING ECO-LABELS IN BIOSPHERE RESERVES 10

3.1 LABEL CLASSIFICATIONS AND RISK-BENEFIT ASSESSMENTS 10

3.2 PRODUCTS AND SERVICES 18

3.3 CRITERIA FOR PRODUCTS AND SERVICES 22

3.4 EVALUATING THE USE OF LABELS 27

3.5 LABEL OWNERSHIP AND MANAGEMENT 28

3.6 FUNDING 33

3.7 LOGO USE 35

4.0 ECO-LABELLING FOR BIOSPHERE RESERVE ECOTOURISM 38

5.0 SUMMARY 44

WHICH LABEL IS RIGHT FOR MY BR? 45

6.0 BIBLIOGRAPHY 47

II
LIST OF TABLES
TABLE 1: LABEL CLASSIFICATIONS, BENEFITS AND CHALLENGES 11
TABLE 2: PRODUCT AND SERVICE ELIGIBILITY ACCORDING TO TIER-BASED
LABELLING CATEGORIES 19
TABLE 3: QUALIFICATIONS FOR LABELLING 23
TABLE 4: ECO-LABELLING EVALUATION METHODS 28
TABLE 5: ECO-LABELLING OWNERSHIP AND MANAGEMENT 29
TABLE 6: TIER-BASED LABELLING COSTS AND ASSOCIATED MEMBERSHIP FEES 34
TABLE 7: LOGO TERMS OF USE AND RECOMMENDED GENERAL PRINCIPLES 35

LIST OF BOXES
BOX 1 : CHALLENGES WITH LABEL DEVELOPMENT AT LAKE TANA BR 6
BOX 2 : THE BENEFITS OF ECO-LABELLING AT SCHORFHEIDE-CHORIN BR 9
BOX 3 : EXAMPLE OF A DESTINATION LABEL USED BY GEORGIAN BAY BR 13
BOX 4 : THE USE OF DIFFERENT PURPOSE-BASED ECO-LABELS AT RHÖN BR 15
BOX 5 : THE WIDE RANGE OF PRODUCTS AND SERVICES AT WEST ESTONIAN 21
ARCHIPELAGO BR
BOX 6 : IMPLEMENTATION OF THE GREEN ECONOMY INITIATIVE AT LA PALMA BR 25
BOX 7 : LABELLING DEVELOPMENT AND ITS CHALLENGES AT SHINAN DADOHAE BR 26
BOX 8 : BANDING STRATEGY AT INDONESIAN BRS 30
BOX 9 : A WIDE RANGE OF STAKEHOLDERS AT CAT BA BR 31
BOX 10: LOCAL GOVERNMENT SUPPORT FOR SUSTAINABLE DEVELOPMENT AT 32
CIBODAS BR
BOX 11: ECOTOURISM LABELLING AT LA PALMA BR 41
BOX 12: ECOTOURISM LABELLING AT SHINAN DADOHAE BR 42
BOX 13: ECOTOURISM LABELLING AT PALAWAN BR 43

LIST OF FIGURES
FIGURE 1 : ELEMENTS TO CONSIDER FOR BR LABELLING DEVELOPMENT 5
FIGURE 2 : APPLYING THE PRINCIPLES OF WHY, WHAT, WHO, WHERE AND HOW 7
FOR BR ECO-LABELLING
FIGURE 3 : TYPES OF ECO-LABELLING SCHEMES 10
FIGURE 4 : RHÖN REGIONAL-QUALITY LABELS ON LOCAL HONEY 16
FIGURE 5 : RHÖNWIESE PRODUCTS 18
FIGURE 6 : CBBR CERTIFICATION ON DISPLAY AT PRINCES HOTEL ON CAT BA ISLAND 31
FIGURE 7 : EXAMPLES FROM GEORGIAN BAY BR BRAND GUIDELINES 36
FIGURE 8 : THE SIX STEPS OF TOURISM’S ECO-LABELLING PROCESS 39
FIGURE 9 : A ROAD SIGN AND INFORMATION BOARD PUBLICISE BIORE-LABELLED
ECOTOURISM SITES 42
FIGURE 10: THE RESERVE’S WEBSITE PROMOTES SEVERAL TOURIST ATTRACTIONS 43

III
IV
1.0 Introduction
This document contains eco-labelling and ecotourism good practices for biosphere reserve
management. This document was developed by UNESCO Office Jakarta with support
from Japanese Funds-in-Trust (JFIT). The good practices presented here are a follow-up to
recommendations made at the 8th Southeast Asia Biosphere Reserves Network (SeaBRnet)
Meeting and the 2nd Asia-Pacific Biosphere Reserves Network (APBRN) Strategic Meeting, both
of which were held in Cambodia in December 2014.

This document is a contribution towards efforts to promote sustainability and sustainable

economic and social development across the Asia and Pacific region. In order to achieve this
objective, the guidelines contained herein have been developed in order to strengthen biosphere
reserves (BRs) to become a tool for promoting a green economy using sustainability science.

This document does not advocate any one particular approach on eco-labelling over another: It
presents a variety of approaches taken by different BRs around the world in order to provide a
basis for discussion and consideration for biosphere reserves in Asia and the Pacific and their
respective stakeholders and networks.

1
 1.1 Background
According to UNESCO (2017a), habitat loss and fragmentation due to human development and
unsustainable consumption and production patterns are among the major causes of diminishing
biodiversity globally. As a follow-up, the Man and the Biosphere (MAB) Programme envisions “a
world where people are conscious of their common future and interaction with our planet, and
act collectively and responsibly to build thriving societies in harmony within the biosphere”. The
current MAB Strategy 2015-2025 includes the following Strategic Action Areas:

a. The World Network of Biosphere Reserves consisting of effectively functioning models for
sustainable development;
b. Inclusive, dynamic and result-oriented collaboration and networking within the MAB
Programme and the World Network of Biosphere Reserves;
c. Effective external partnerships and sufficient and sustainable funding for the MAB
Programme and the World Network of Biosphere Reserves;
d. Comprehensive, modern, open and transparent communication, information and data
sharing; and
e. Effective governance of and within the MAB Programme and the World Network of
Biosphere Reserves.

(Source: UNESCO, 2017a)

To ensure the effective implementation of the MAB Strategy 2015-2025, the Lima Action Plan
(2016-2025) was developed to guide UNESCO’s MAB Programme and its World Network of
Biosphere Reserves (WNBR). The Lima Action Plan places strong emphasis on thriving societies
living in harmony with the biosphere in order to achieve the United Nations’ Sustainable
Development Goals (SDGs) and the successful implementation of the 2030 Agenda for
Sustainable Development, both within biosphere reserves and beyond. This will be achieved
through the global dissemination of the models of sustainability developed in biosphere reserves
(UNESCO, 2017a).

2
The Lima Action Plan describes eco-labelling as an output to promote green/sustainable/socially
economic initiatives inside BRs, to contribute towards Strategic Action Area A1: “Biosphere
Reserves recognised as models contributing to the implementation of SDGs and Multilateral
Environmental Agreements (MEAs)” (UNESCO, 2017a). Eco-labelling can be defined as “a seal
of approval given to products that are deemed to have fewer impacts on the environment than
functionally or competitively similar products” (Salzman, 1991).

As part of efforts to establish a globally-recognised BR logo or brand (Strategic Action Areas

C7.1, C7.2 and C8.1), the MAB Secretariat issued a questionnaire to collect information on the
current situation regarding the development of BR logos at local and national levels, and to
review progress made in the use of logos on marketed products, goods and services via labelling
schemes (UNESCO, 2018). A total of 261 BRs within the WNBR participated in the survey; 53
percent of respondents came from Europe and North America, followed by 16 percent from Asia
Pacific; 15 percent came from Latin America and the Caribbean, 10 percent came from Africa and
6 percent from the Arab States region. The survey concluded that there was a need for a flexible
brand strategy to enable biosphere reserves within the WNBR network to share a common vision
while highlighting their own key characteristics in a logo design. Simple guidelines for the design
of a logo should enhance a sense of belonging as well as increase the credibility of an individual
brand and reduce communication costs for BRs that have limited budgets for marketing. The
logo can be used for collaborations with various WNBR stakeholders from across the network
to publicise and promote each BR together with their respective management teams and local
community.

Recognising the importance of eco-labelling, the number of eco-labels available in the market
increased rapidly; however, this resulted in consumer confusion between self-declared and
third party-certified labels (Poncibo, 2007, in OECD, 2008). This was primarily due to a lack of
regulations governing eco-labels along with limited consumer awareness. As a consequence,
BR-related eco-labelling must be developed in a well-considered way so as to create a strong
image that prevents consumer confusion.

3
 This document has been developed by UNESCO Office Jakarta to support BR management in
establishing eco-labelling schemes in biosphere reserves across the Asia and Pacific region,
which is characterised by tremendous diversity in terms of social, economic and political
landscapes. BRs in Asia and the Pacific comprise 147 sites in the following 24 countries: Australia,
Cambodia, China, India, Indonesia, Islamic Republic of Iran, Japan, Kazakhstan, Democratic
People’s Republic of Korea (DPRK), Republic of Korea, Kyrgyzstan, Malaysia, Maldives, Federated
States of Micronesia, Mongolia, Myanmar, Pakistan, Palau, Philippines, Sri Lanka, Thailand,
Turkmenistan, Uzbekistan, and Vietnam (UNESCO MAB, 2017c). Each site in Asia and the Pacific
has varying capacity and resources with which to manage their BR. To accommodate these
differing circumstances across the region, four sub-regional biosphere reserve networks have
been created under the auspices of the MAB Programme:

• East Asian Biosphere Reserve Network (EABRN), comprising China, DPRK, Japan,
Mongolia, Republic of Korea and the Russian Federation;

• Pacific Man and Biosphere Reserve Network (PacMAB), comprising six Pacific island
countries (Federated States of Micronesia, Kiribati, Palau, Papua New Guinea, Samoa and
Tonga);

• South and Central Asia MAB Network (SACAM), comprising Afghanistan, Bangladesh,
Bhutan, India, Iran, Kazakhstan, Maldives, Nepal, Pakistan and Sri Lanka; and

• Southeast Asia Biosphere Reserves Network (SeaBRnet), comprising nine Southeast Asian
countries (Cambodia, Lao PDR, Indonesia, Malaysia, Myanmar, the Philippines, Thailand,
Timor-Leste and Vietnam).

Biosphere reserves in Asia and the Pacific remain relatively unknown by the general public, and
do not get much publicity. Even some communities that live near or in BR sites do not know of
their existence (UNESCO Office Jakarta, 2010). This suggests the need to increase the visibility
of BRs across the region; one way to achieve this is through eco-labelling and ecotourism. In
Southeast Asia, ecotourism has been implemented in many countries across the sub-region, but
eco-labelling is still a new concept in certain countries and needs further efforts to focus on its
implementation (UNESCO Office Jakarta, 2015).

The guidelines presented in this document draw upon established practices and international
eco-labelling and certification schemes, which present a range of options for engagement that
allows BR managers and other users to decide which eco-labelling approach will best suit their
needs.

In practice, a large number of existing eco-labels are linked to the tourist industry; indeed, the
increase in tourism-related eco-labels has occurred alongside the growth of ecotourism. It is
hard to determine, however, whether the rise in ecotourism has led to more labels or the other
way around (Piper and Yeo, 2011). After all, eco-labels and ecotourism have a strong correlation
in wishing to balance the supply and demand for green products, since ecotourism attracts
consumers with great awareness about eco-friendly products and services. Therefore, when
developing eco-labels, BR managers should consider all relevant products and services within
their respective reserve’s boundaries, including ecotourism-related products and services.

4
1.2 Things to Consider when Developing BR Labels
The good practices described here provide guidance for biosphere reserve stakeholders in
determining the most suitable labelling scheme for their respective BR. All the main characteristics
of each reserve, including ecosystem diversity, social and cultural behaviour, characteristics of
target markets and local governance systems, result in the need to tailor BR management in
accordance with the local context.

When determining the most suitable labelling scheme, BR managers need to assess their own
capacity and define their key objectives. An initial assessment includes a self-assessment to
determine their ability to maintain and monitor label implementation during the years ahead. It is
important to know the limitation of a particular BR’s management or relevant authority from the
very beginning in order to set a realistic scope and create a feasible labelling scheme.

During the initial stage of developing BR-related eco-labels, the participation of all BR stakeholders
is essential to identify their respective interests in eco-labelling so as to ensure their ongoing
support for the scheme. A BR’s capacity to implement continued verification and monitoring
over the short to medium term should also be considered when choosing the most suitable
scheme. If it is found that no authority exists with the required capacity, discussions should take
place to determine whether a new agency or association would be more effective.

There is a wide range of different products and services available within each biosphere reserve.
For each separate type, different standards and criteria should be established to ensure the
reserve’s economic, environmental and social sustainability. Therefore, BR managers need to
carefully determine which kinds of products and services are to be covered by the labelling
scheme according to their capacity and sustainability objectives.

After the different products and services have been determined, each product’s life cycle should
be reviewed to ensure that labelling standards can feasibly be implemented without disrupting
the production and distribution chain. One example might be a case where one component of
a particular product needs to be obtained from outside the BR; in such an event, a minimum
percentage of locally-sourced raw materials may be required.

Figure 1: Elements to Consider for BR Labelling Development

Another important consideration is the target market for products and services. By identifying

5
 both existing and potentially new target markets, producers and business owners are able to
define market preferences and which standards should be applied to attract their chosen target
groups. For instance, if producers aim to target multinational companies as their target market,
international-standard certification may be the preferred method to attract them.
BR-related eco-labelling schemes should ideally consider existing national regulations and
policies that are applied in a given reserve’s location. Eco-labelling criteria can adopt national
quality standards and existing certification schemes, while also applying additional criteria to
ensure the BR’s sustainability.
Before identifying the most suitable scheme, BR stakeholders need to understand the benefits
and challenges offered by each scheme, as well as their own capacity to guarantee the scheme’s
full implementation. Examples of some of the benefits and challenges that may be encountered
are laid out in Table 1 (see page 1)
Gallarraga Gallastegui (2002) mentioned that in developing eco-labels, the following aspects
need to be considered: (i) the type of environmental standard required (high/medium/low); (ii)
the most appropriate financing system(s); (iii) consumer reaction; and (iv) the effects on prices
and demand of non-labelled goods; that is, on prices and demand of close substitutes as well
as on market shares.
Figure 1 summarises the key elements to consider when developing an eco-label scheme for
a BR. These elements are equally essential for identifying the most suitable labelling scheme
according to each BR’s capacity and local context.
By answering the questions below (Figure 2), BR managers can identify any gaps between the
scheme they envision and their existing capacity.
In practice, there are many challenges that BR managers should anticipate before developing
and implementing a BR label. Lessons drawn from Lake Tana Biosphere Reserve are provided
in Box 1. This example shows the importance of securing regulatory support when developing
a BR labelling scheme.

Box 1: Challenges with Label Development at Lake Tana BR

Lake Tana Biosphere Reserve (LTBR), Ethiopia

http://www.laketana-biosphere.com/

Lake Tana is an agricultural region that has become famous as a tourist

hotspot. It is home to 2.5 million people; however, most of the locals
are not familiar with the biosphere reserve that lies within the Lake
Tana region. Given these opportunities and challenges, German non-
governmental nature conservation association NABU (Naturschutzbund
Deutschland) conducted a comprehensive study to develop and
implement an umbrella label for LTBR.

The labelling scheme proposed for LTBR has a comprehensive plan,

including a labelling authority and membership scheme (see Worku and
Gebey, 2016). The umbrella label is intended to create a sense of identity,
provide added value to local products, and act as a communication
tool to indicate producers’ and service providers’ efforts to improve the
quality of their products/services in an environmentally-friendly manner.
Despite positive responses from the BR managers and local businesses,
however, the labelling plan has not yet been implemented.

6
due to limitations and constraints in current regulations and policies. Current government policy only
allows producers and service providers to register their trademarks and labels for a single specific
business. This means that the BR’s proposed umbrella label, which would apply to a range of products
and services from multiple businesses, is not legally viable. Moreover, an application for a new eco-
label cannot be proposed by the BR managers or any other entities, including non-governmental
organisations (NGOs). In order to implement this scheme, national legislation will have to be amended,
which will require a great deal more time and resources.

There are currently 10 cooperatives and producer groups that are interested in participating in the
labelling programme. One of the producer groups has added a note to their product to indicate that it
originates from the Lake Tana BR, although no criteria are in place

It is also important to identify target markets for labelled products. In the case of Lake Tana BR,
although the locals feel a sense of pride about their local products, their purchasing power is low;
therefore, the NABU study recommended that the reserve’s managers should target tourists in their
marketing efforts.

The experience of LTBR provides important lessons on how to develop a BR labelling scheme. Firstly,
it is necessary to develop a good structure that enables all producers to participate in developing
criteria and implementing the scheme. Another important consideration is to identify the customers
who are willing and able to pay more for eco-friendly products and services. Finally, regulatory support
is crucial to ensure the successful establishment of an eco-labelling scheme.

Source: Interview with Ms. Ronja Krebs (January 24, 2018)

Figure 2: Applying the Principles of Why, What, Who, Where and How for BR Eco-labelling

7
 2.0 Benefits of Applying Eco-labels in Biosphere Reserves
According to Agenda 21, the UN’s action plan on sustainable development, eco-labels are
identified as a way of encouraging consumers to adopt more sustainable consumption
patterns by purchasing products that are more resource- and energy-efficient. This concept
supports environmental sustainability through consumers substituting purchases for more
environmentally-friendly products, thereby resulting in more sustainable consumption (Horne,
2009). The concept also encourages consumers to look beyond the products and services
and become more aware of product life cycles and service operations, and to ask themselves
whether or not their choices are having a negative impact on the environment as a result.

Having reviewed 36 different labelling schemes, Horne (2009) concluded that eco-labels can
lead to continuous reduction of negative environmental impacts.1 To cite one example, it was
found that the tightened criteria of Germany’s Blue Angel label resulted in a reduction of negative
environmental impacts (i.e reduced CO2 and Nitrogen Oxide emissions). However, these
reductions may have also been affected by parallel technological developments (Eberle and
Reuter, 2003, in OECD, 2005). It is therefore more accurate to maintain that although eco-labels
do play a part in reducing negative environmental impact, the scale of the impact may not be
major.

According to the International Institute for Sustainable Development (IISD, n.d.), eco-labels carry
benefits for both producers and consumers; these include well-informed consumer choice;2
stimulating market development towards greater environmental awareness; and encouraging
continuous development. Furthermore, research was carried out by the Organisation for
Economic Co-operation and Development (OECD, 2005), which among other things looked at
the impact of eco-labels on producers and consumer behaviour. For producers, eco-labels were
seen as a method of communication in setting standards for environmental benchmarking.
Eco-labelling enables producers to prove their credibility in the face of increased demand for
environmentally-friendly products, while eco-labelling requirements encourage producers to set
specific goals for improving their products. With regards to consumer behaviour, the research
found that eco-labels increased consumers’ awareness about the environment. This conclusion
is supported by the findings of several other studies, which reveal consumers’ willingness to pay
more for eco-labelled products. It should be noted, however, that some research suggests that
eco-labels may lead to increased levels of consumption due to a misconception that consumers
are playing their part for the environment by buying “green products”. In the context of the
environment, eco-labels act as a facilitator and first initiative for the creation of new binding
regulations. They also encourage consumers to be more environmentally friendly, and they set
new standards for product development and manufacturing (OECD, 2005).

Additionally, eco-labels help to support local economies as they guarantee not only the origin
of a given product, they also promote sustainable production.3 For example, labelling products
as mountain goods from a particular source is an important marketing tool, as it can produce
benefits for communities living in mountainous areas that may have strong agricultural traditions
but poor economies.4 In summary, eco-labelling offers a variety of potential benefits for both
consumers and producers, in terms of economic, social and environmental considerations,
while at the same time ensuring environmental sustainability for BRs.

1 He also stated, however, that the reductions were not significant (Horne, 2009).
2 See also Horne, 2009.
3 See Kinckel and Renting, 2002; Boesch et al 2008; Ghazoul et al 2009.
8 4 See FAO, 2009; FAO, 2011.
Box 2 below presents the benefits of applying eco-labels at Schorfheide-Chorin BR. The reserve
benefited greatly, particularly economically, through the implementation of the labelling scheme

Box 2: The Benefits of Eco-labelling at Schorfheide-Chorin BR.

Schorfheide-Chorin Biosphere Reserve, Germany

http://www.schorfheide-chorin-biosphaerenreservat.de/

Schorfheide-Chorin BR, which stretches across the German districts

of Barnim, Uckermark, Märkisch-Oderland and Oberhavel, introduced a
regional brand known as Prüfzeichen. This label was established in 1998
to encourage local enterprises and stakeholders to assist the public
to engage with the biosphere reserve in an environmentally-friendly
manner while maintaining the historic cultural landscape of the area
and increasing the income of participating enterprises (UNESCO and
National Natural Landscapes, 2007; Blahy and Peil, 2010).

A logo, created by the biosphere reserve, aimed to improve the marketing of regional products and
services for both locals and tourists, as well as to strengthen the regional economy, ecological
agriculture and high-quality food producers. To ensure the quality of the region’s products and
services, different criteria were created and applied, according to their particularities. For example,
the criteria for honey stipulate that it must be free from pharmaceutical ingredients, pesticides and
other artificial additives.

The Prüfzeichen label is used in the following sectors: agriculture, horticulture, bee-farming, fisheries,
food production, handicrafts/arts and crafts, and gastronomy as well as for eco-friendly lodgings and
sustainable tourism. More specific criteria are currently being prepared for forest products (which are
also in the process of being internationally certified) as well as for wild-animal products. The regional
label is also applicable for enterprises participating in other existing schemes, such as Demeter for
organic farming, Viabono for gastronomy and the Forest Stewardship Council for forestry. In practice,
existing certification schemes and their regulatory mechanisms have been used at Schorfheide-
Chorin BR to reduce both costs and workload.

The regional label’s standards were developed by a committee of experts comprising marketing
specialists and representatives from the BR, together with certified entrepreneurs and a regional
partnership association. Applicants are assessed by independent institutions, which include ecological
and agricultural associations and other industries, or otherwise by the BR’s administrative team.
Biannual certification is issued to producers and service providers who meet the required criteria.
Regular monitoring also takes place twice a year, while certification can be extended by paying an
annual fee - the cost of which is calculated based on a business’ revenue.

The users of this label have benefited from the implementation of the labelling scheme. According
to a 2009 study conducted by Popp (see Blahy & Peil, 2010), between 15 and 25 jobs were created
in the region as a result of the labelling scheme, after 11 years of implementation. The study also
found that in many cases, the image of local products and services improved; however, there was
no substantial increase in business revenues. This finding was corroborated by Schorfheide-Chorin
BR’s representative, Ms. Beate Blahy, who observed that the benefits of the Prüfzeichen brand are not
measurable in Euros. Nevertheless, most of the label’s users stated that it provided certain advantages
in terms of greater appeal when advertising their products and services to target markets.

9
 In the tourist sector, it has been observed that visitors often ask for local brands and environmentally-
friendly offers. In this way, the Prüfzeichen label has helped to create a new segment of the tourist
market as well as supporting local economic activities. A central issue with the implementation of
the label is to ensure that there is sufficient manpower to conduct the ongoing monitoring while also
collating regular feedback from consumers of the region’s products and services. It is also necessary
to keep updating the contents of the labels to reflect current market requirements.

Source: Email interview with Ms. Beate Blahy (January 26, 2018)

3.0 Developing Eco-labels in Biosphere Reserves

3.1 Label Classifications and Risk-Benefit Assessments
In general, eco-labelling schemes can be classified by one of three categories; namely, BR
destination label, BR quality label, and professional certification label (Figure 3).

Tier 3
Professional Certification
Tier 2
BR Quality Label
Tier 1
BR Destination
Label

Figure 3: Types of Eco-labelling Schemes

The relevance of each scheme to a given biosphere reserve depends upon: (i) the capacity of
the BR; (ii) the available products and services within its geographical boundary; and (iii) the
availability of relevant, professional, third-party certification scheme(s) - nationally and/or
internationally. Each category of scheme has its own benefits and challenges, as presented in
Table 1.

The Tier 1 BR destination label is used by all businesses and organisations that are located
and operate either within a given BR’s geographical boundary or another boundary determined
by a relevant authority. This scheme is primarily concerned with promoting local products and
services within a BR’s geographical area. The procedure for applying this scheme is easily
adopted as it does not require verification or monitoring. The label may be used freely by the
relevant businesses and organisations; if requirements apply, they are minimal. Given that
permission to use the label is relatively easy to obtain, it is primarily beneficial as a promotional
tool. However, as this scheme does not contain any standards or requirements, it cannot
guarantee environmental sustainability or an increase in social values.

10
 Table 1: Label Classifications, Benefits and Challenges
Tier 1:
BR Destination Label
LABEL CLASSIFICATIONS FOR PRODUCTS AND SERVICES5
All products and services that
are produced and operated
within BR geographical
boundary or other boundary
determined by a relevant
authority.
BENEFITS
• Strong association with BR
image and, thus, beneficial
as a promotional tool for
products and services;
• Since a lot of products and
services can apply for this
label, the logo will be more
recognisable to a wider
market audience.
5 Adopted and modified from the Rhön BR labelling scheme (Pokorny, 2011).
Tier 2:
BR Quality Label
All products and services that
are produced and operated
within BR geographical
boundary or other boundary
determined by a relevant
authority, and that meet
criteria set by the BR’s
management.
• Strong eco-friendly image
for products/services;
• Sense of pride for producers
and consumers;
• Encourages continual
improvement and
innovation;
• Increases environmental
awareness.
Tier 3:
Professional Certification
Label
All products and services that
are produced and operated
within BR geographical
boundary or other boundary
determined by a relevant
authority, and that meet
standards recognised by
international eco-certification.
It is possible to allow
producers and businesses
to use BR destination or BR
quality labels once they have
been granted a professional
certification label. In this case,
certification partnerships are
encouraged.
• Strong association with BR
image and, thus, beneficial
as a promotional tool for
products and services;
• Strong eco-friendly image
for products/services;
• Sense of pride for producers
and consumers;
• Encourages continual
improvement and
innovation;
• Increases environmental
awareness;
• Quality standards are widely
recognised by national and
international markets;
• Stronger marketing and
promotional strategy;
• Highly committed to
minimising negative
environmental impacts;
11
 • Quality assurance through
regular monitoring by
certification experts;
• Availability of professional
advice for improving the
efficiency of products and
services;.
• Provides a platform
for businesses and
organisations to discuss
and exchange information.

CHALLENGES

• There is no quality control • There is a need to ensure • There is a need to ensure

to determine if the label
is being properly applied
by businesses and
organisations;
• No revenue is generated by
the application of the label;
• There is less status for
the producers and service
providers who apply the
label.
the capacity of producers
and service providers to
meet the requirements;
• There is a need to maintain
the quality of products
and services, as well as to
ensure the product cycle
meets required standards;
• There is a need to raise
consumer awareness about
green products over cheap
products.
the capacity of producers
and service providers to
meet the requirements;
• There is a need to raise
consumer awareness about
green products over cheap
products;
• Higher costs, particularly for
membership fees;
• Strict requirements and
measurements that might
be difficult for small
producers to achieve.

The BR destination label can be used without formally agreeing to do so for a particular length
of time, although applicants may need to obtain permission from a BR’s management before
applying the label. Since there is no membership fee for users of BR destination labels, BR
managers are not able to generate revenue from this category of eco-labelling programme.
Moreover, as destination-label users are not expected to meet any specific requirements,
there is an additional challenge of building a sense of status or pride in the label among the
businesses and organisations that use it. This in turn may also lead to difficulties in publicising
the importance and the values of the biosphere reserve to which the label is linked.

12
 Box 3: Example of a Destination Label Used by Georgian Bay BR

Georgian Bay Biosphere Reserve, Canada

https://www.gbbr.ca/

The Georgian Bay Biosphere Reserve, located in Canada, comprises

the largest island archipelago of the North American Great Lakes and
consists of a complex association of bays, inlets, sounds, islands and
shoals lying along the edge of the Canadian Shield bedrock. It has
been designated as a UNESCO Biosphere Reserve since 2004 with a
recognised administrative authority (source: UNESCO).

Georgian Bay BR Inc. is an established brand that can be freely used

by all businesses and organisations within the reserve’s boundary. The
logo was designed to encompass the bay’s unique biosphere reserve
concept. Brand guidelines on using the logo are publicly available on
the Georgian Bay BR website.6

The second category of labelling is a BR quality label. The application of this label is restricted
to those products and services that comply with pre-determined criteria; as such, the BR quality
label provides assurances to consumers about the production process and the quality of the
final product or service that they wish to purchase.

There are three goals that must be achieved in order to guarantee the success of this Tier 2
labelling programme:

• To be informative and easily understood by consumers;

• To reduce product-related environmental pollution through innovation and the diffusion of

environmentally improved products; and

• To provide sufficient economic incentives to manufacturers to encourage them to join the

programme. (Muller, 2002)

Horne (2009) maintains that when developing eco-labels, there should be transparency,
evidence-based information and meaningful engagement with stakeholders to create credibility
and improve consumer awareness about the label. The Forest Stewardship Council (FSC)
label, for instance, which is an internationally recognised label that guarantees the responsible
management of the world’s forests, has gained significant public credibility because of its
engagement in multi-stakeholder environments (UNEP, 2005).

In countries where consumers are not as highly motivated by environmental concerns, eco-
labelling can be used to promote and influence environmental actions. Most eco-label criteria
place great concern on a product’s entire life cycle, which in the case of textiles will range from
the production of fibres through to the disposal of the discarded product. Therefore, the BR
quality label is able to protect innovative manufacturers from “free-riders”, whose products and
processes bear little commitment to environmental protection (SBA, 2006).

6 See GBBR, n.d.

13
 In developing the BR quality label, the authorisation body needs to set certain criteria to be
fulfilled by all applicants. It is imperative, therefore, that BR managers carefully consider the local
context when determining the criteria. If the authorisation body imposes simple requirements,
many firms will succeed in obtaining the label, but their environmental efforts are unlikely to
be noticeable. If instead the requirements are strict, labelled firms will engage in significant
environmental practices but there will be too few of them to make a positive difference (Forlin,
2015).

Bearing in mind these considerations and challenges, one of the most important tools to
ensure the effectiveness of an eco-labelling scheme is campaigning to educate members of the
public and raise consumer awareness (Charter et al., 2001). Campaigning helps to disseminate
knowledge and increase environmental consciousness among consumers, which ultimately
leads to greater market demand for environmentally-friendly products and services.

The most stringent BR-related eco-label is the Tier 3 professional certification label. This
scheme integrates the BR quality label with the professional international-certification label. By
complying with a number of criteria and requirements that are set by an external certification
agency, the sustainability of labelled products’ and services’ life cycles are both guaranteed and
strictly monitored by the agency.

In the context of international trade, several concerns are raised by Guevara et al. (1997) about
the potential impact on developing-country trade:

i. Developing countries believe that domestic interests mainly dictate the product-selection
process and, thus, producers may be required to meet criteria that are not relevant in the
producing country;

ii. Developing countries are concerned about the lack of transparency throughout the
process;

iii. They are equally concerned about the discriminatory effects entailed in the use of standard
process and production methods (PPM); and

iv. They are afraid of losing competitive advantage as a result of higher costs of production
and operation.

Germany’s Rhön BR applies all three types of eco-label plus two additional labelling schemes
within the reserve’s boundary. Box 4 describes how different labels have been introduced in
order to address a range of different purposes, and how each one has its own benefits and
challenges. By providing several different labels, local producers are able to choose the one that
is most suitable for their particular business.

14
 Box 4: The Use of Different Purpose-based Eco-labels at Rhön BR

Rhön Biosphere Reserve, Germany

http://biosphaerenreservat-rhoen.de/

The founding vision of Rhön BR’s management was to promote “conservation and the sustainable use
of the Rhön area’s cultural landscape, with its high biodiversity of species and habitats, for the sake of
both people and nature” (Pokorny, 2011). Aligned with this vision, Dachmarke Rhön, an independent
association for Rhön BR labelling, developed several branding schemes to strengthen local small and
medium enterprises (SMEs) in the region.

Kraus et al. (2014) maintain that the multi-labelling scheme at Rhön Biosphere Reserve has helped to
strengthen a number of local added-value chains. According to Dachmarke Rhön’s Managing Director,
Barbara Landgraf, the labelling scheme provides a series of additional benefits:

• Each label offers credibility to producers/businesses as well as a guarantee to consumers,

encouraging them to buy the region’s eco-friendly products;

• The Rhön region contains an array of small and micro enterprises, many of which do not have
the necessary resources to undertake in-house marketing of their products. By being part of the
BR’s labelling scheme, however, they gain greater exposure by accessing the region’s collective
marketing programme, which is led by Dachmarke Rhön. In this way, they can receive support
with online promotions, as well as at local fairs and markets;

• Dachmarke Rhön has a strong network that can connect producers and businesses to create
supply-chain relationships; and

• A strong brand identity has been developed in the market due to the success of the BR’s multi-
labelling scheme.

Lessons learnt from Dachmarke Rhön include:

• Labelling is a challenge, but it can provide partners, particularly SMEs, with many benefits.
Linking a labelling scheme with ecotourism is an effective way to reach a wider market;

• Providing ongoing support to local people, engaging SMEs as partners, and offering
consultations to SMEs are all important factors;

• It is important to have both government support and external assistance from, for instance,
entrepreneurs, international organisations or sponsorship. The Rhön labelling scheme has
benefited from strong government support; however, it has been observed that obtaining
support from other sources would help to ensure the programme’s future sustainability; and

• A labelling scheme is a win-win solution that promotes and strengthens nature conservation,
the green economy and sustainable tourism, all through local products. Such schemes also
promote a greater sense of local identity, and levels the playing field for SMEs.

One brand for all

Rhön BR developed a brand label in 2003, which is used to provide

regional identity among institutions, associations and administrations
within the BR’s geographical boundary. This label aims to strengthen the
identification of the region by unifying the image of the region under one
Tagline: label.

“Simply impressive”

15
 The label can be used by all inhabitants, administrations and enterprises within the Rhön reserve - for
websites, business letterheads, tourism marketing and so on - to send the message that they are part
of the region and they are proud of their homeland. In order to use this label, applicants only need to
obtain permission from Dachmarke Rhön. There are no criteria or fees attached to this label; however,
product manufacturers and service providers that use this label are not eligible to apply for product/
service awards.

Two brands for food producers and food services

In 2005, Rhön BR established a regional-quality label for use by partner

enterprises. As its name suggests, this label is intended for regional food
products and services that meet specified sustainable-development
criteria. The application of this label is limited to registered products/
services only.

The label may be used by members of the Dachmarke Rhön association,

Tagline: and an annual membership fee is charged for the certification. Eligible
“Quality of the Biosphere businesses for this certification are:
Reserve”

• Producers (e.g. farmers, butchers, bakers, brewers, makers of handicrafts and Christmas-tree
growers);
• Food/catering services that use regional products in their kitchens.

This label adopts existing standards used in similar labelling schemes, plus additional criteria relating
to Rhön reserve’s specific aims such as, for example, using regionally-sourced materials/ingredients
to create a closed-value chain in the region. When implementing this labelling scheme, the following
two steps must be conducted on an annual basis:

• Step 1: All relevant documentation is checked by Dachmarke Rhön;

• Step 2: External, independent certification partners monitor labelled products and services.
(Dachmarke Rhön provides the certification partners with additional criteria to ensure the
products/services meet the label’s requirements).

For the region’s food services, annual random checks are conducted on around 30% of members
due to limited resources; plus, there is no independent certification agency available to monitor food
services.

With regards to small and micro enterprises, which are not included in the formal certification system,
Dachmarke Rhön works with state and county food inspectors to monitor the businesses. These
partnerships are based on voluntary agreements, as Dachmarke Rhön has strong support from local
county managers.

©Dachmarke Rhön
Figure 4: Rhön Regional-quality Labels on Local Honey

16
Since 2009, Rhön BR has recognised professional-management certification, which integrates
quality labelling with existing German and European Union (EU) environmental standards to ensure
compliance with strict ecological practices. This label applies EU rules on organic farming, in addition
to the criteria belonging to the regional-quality label.

Members of this scheme must pay an annual fee to Dachmarke Rhön for the professional-certification
label; the amount of the fee depends upon the size of the business.

The types of businesses that are eligible to apply for professional-management certification are:
• Producers (e.g. farmers, butchers, bakers, brewers etc.) whose produce/products are both
regional and organic;
• Food/catering-service providers that use regionally-grown organic products in their kitchens.
As with the regional-quality label, this eco-quality label also applies regular checks and monitoring to
ensure members comply fully with all criteria.

An additional brand for food and catering services

The Silberdistel label – whose name means “silver thistle” which is Rhön’s
floral emblem - was introduced solely for use by food- and catering-
service providers. This label is voluntarily awarded to service providers
that include a minimum percentage of regionally-grown produce in their
ingredients or regionally-produced materials in their kitchens, as follows:

One thistle is awarded for a minimum 35%

of regional produce/products;

Quality brand with Two thistles are awarded for a minimum 45%
of regional produce/products;
“silver thistles”

Three are awarded for a minimum 65% of

regional produce/products.

Specific criteria apply to this label, for which regular monitoring is

conducted. Members of this scheme also pay a fee for using this label.

An additional brand for food producers

Rhönwiese is an additional brand for small producers who wish to sell

their products in the wider food-retail market but who, given their limited
size, find it hard to fulfil all the existing German and EU requirements.

All applicants must comply with the criteria associated with Rhön’s
quality label and be willing to use an established corporate brand design.
Each item for sale has a bar code, and all members must obtain external
Quality brand with quality-assurance accreditation (which is based on the International
Featured Standard (IFS) system but modified for SMEs).
“silver thistles”
A membership fee is payable for use of this label. Dachmarke Rhön also
assists member SMEs with training and financial support, if and when
necessary.

17
 ©Dachmarke Rhön
Figure 5: Rhönwiese Products

Source: Interview with Ms. Barbara Landgraf (February 7, 2018)

It should be noted that although the three aforementioned labelling schemes provide examples
of how the three labelling categories may be applied in practice, they do not offer an exhaustive
list of possibilities. On the contrary, the range of different labelling schemes may be further
explored and/or modified in order to meet the needs of individual biosphere reserves.

3.2 Products and Services

As there is a wide range of different products and services that can be targeted by eco-labelling
programmes, it is necessary to categorise them all in order to determine the most suitable and
specific criteria to be applied to each one.

When developing BR quality labels, managers at each biosphere reserve should determine not
only the main products and services within their reserve area but also which ones have the
greatest impact on the environment.

In the case of professional certification labels, for example, each label has its own specialisation
in terms of objective:

• Energy Star focuses on reducing the energy consumption of home appliances and
electronics, computers, lighting and building products;

• Forest Stewardship Council (FSC) focuses on responsible forest management in the

production of wood and forestry products;

• Marine Stewardship Council (MSC) promotes sustainable fishing practices to preserve

fish stocks as well as marine habitats and livelihoods;

• Demeter Certification is provided to products from biodynamic agriculture, which promotes

environmentally-sustainable cultivation methods such as crop rotation, composting and
the use of homeopathic sprays to ensure the long-term health of soil.

18
 Table 2: Product and Service Eligibility According to Tier-based Labelling Categories

Tier 1: Tier 2: Tier 3:

BR Destination Label BR Quality Label Professional Certification
Label

LABELLING CATEGORIES FOR PRODUCTS

All products • Agriculture & The following lists provide

Horticulture examples of professional
• Fisheries certification labels available to
products within each quality-
• Processed Food
label category. They are
• Crafts applicable at either regional,
• Restaurants national or international levels:

• Agriculture &
Horticulture
Coffee: 4C Association,
Rainforest Alliance, UTZ
certified;

Tea: Rainforest Alliance,

UTZ certified, Bio-Siegel;

Fruit and Vegetables:

Non-GMO Project Verified,
Bio-Siegel;

Dairy Products: Non-GMO

Project Verified;

Nuts: USDA Organic;

Beauty Products: Ecocert,

USDA Organic;

Grains: Non-GMO Project

Verified;

Cocoa: Rainforest Alliance,

UTZ certified.

• Fisheries
Seafood: MSC

• Processed Food: USDA

Organic

• Crafts: Blue Angel

• Restaurants: Viabono
• Forestry Products: FSC

19
 LABELLING CATEGORIES FOR SERVICES

All services • Accommodation The following lists provide

• Transportation examples of professional
certification labels available
• Ecotourism:
for services within each
• Destination quality-label category. Like the
Management product labels above, they can
• Travel Agencies be applied at regional, national
• Local Guides and international levels:
• Tourist Activities • Accommodation
Hotels: Earthcheck,
Biosphere Hotels, Green
Key, Viabono, Control Union,
Eco Tourism Certification;

Cruises: ISO 14001

(environmental
management system –
EMS) and ISO 9001 (quality
management system –
QMS) certification.

• Transportation
Boating Tourism Operators:
Blue Flag

• Ecotourism
Destination Management:
Earthcheck;
Tour Operators & Travel
Agencies: Control Union,
Travelife for Tour Operators,
Eco Tourism Certification.

One of the most widely-known professional certification labelling schemes is Europe’s EU

Ecolabel, which provides specific classifications on a wide range of products and services that
the label covers. These include soaps, shampoos and hair conditioners; rinse-off cosmetics;
absorbent hygiene products; all-purpose cleaners, and cleaners for sanitary facilities; detergents
and dishwashers; industrial and institutional automatic dishwasher detergents; hand dishwashing
detergents; laundry detergents; industrial and institutional laundry detergents; textiles; footwear;
indoor and outdoor paints and varnishes; imaging equipment; personal computers; portable
computers; televisions; wooden floor coverings; hard coverings; textile floor coverings; wooden
furniture; soil improvers; growing media; light sources; heat pumps; water-based heaters;
lubricants; bed mattresses; sanitary tapware; flushing toilets and urinals; converted paper;
newsprint paper; printed paper; copy and graphic paper; tissue paper; campsite services; and
tourist accommodation services. In addition to this extensive list of products and services,
new product groups have been put forward for evaluation and possible inclusion (European
Commission, 2016).

20
In the services category, EU Ecolabel’s tourist accommodation services primarily focus on
electricity and water consumption; refuse production; the tendency to use renewable resources
as well as environmentally-friendly substances and materials; and promoting environmental
targets through well-selected communication and environmental training (Ryglova, 2007).

With regards to ecotourism, Simatupang et al. classified ecotourism products at Gayo Lues
regency in Aceh province, Indonesia within natural, cultural and man-made attractions; tourist
activities and facilities; infrastructure; and souvenirs. According to this classification, natural
attractions include waterfalls, landscapes, mountains, rivers, and all other natural elements
that are considered as having a certain value for tourism. Cultural attractions include traditional
houses or villages, traditional funeral practices and historic structures and relics, while examples
of man-made attractions include theme parks, water parks and museums. Tourist activities are
defined as the main component of tour packages, and they include village-biking, planting coral
reefs, cookery classes and learning about local livelihoods. Tourism facilities, meanwhile, were
identified as including accommodation, restaurants, clean-water providers, banks, health centres,
electricity, transportation and bird-watching towers. Access roads, sea ports and airports come
under tourist infrastructure, while handicrafts are considered souvenirs (Simatupang et al.,
2014).

A number of biosphere reserves have applied their own BR-quality labels to their main products.
For example, Aya Biosphere Reserve in Japan has applied an in-house label to their agricultural
products, while in the Republic of Korea, Shinan Dadohae Biosphere Reserve created and applies
a label, known as BIORE, to the reserve’s agricultural and marine products to enhance local
producers’ competitiveness in wider markets.7

Another eco-labelling programme, at the West Estonian Archipelago BR (Box 5), covers a wide
range of different products and services. The scheme itself has grown organically over time as
a result of addressing new and evolving needs and circumstances.

Box 5: The Wide Range of Products and Services at West Estonian Archipelago BR

West Estonian Archipelago Biosphere Reserve, Estonia

https://www.keskkonnaamet.ee/en/environmental-board-contacts/unesco

The West Estonian Archipelago BR was designated a UNESCO Biosphere

Reserve in 1990. The reserve, which is situated in the eastern Baltic
Sea, comprises the islands of Hiiumaa, Saaremaa, Vormsi and Muhu,
together with hundreds of smaller islets and marine areas (UNESCO,
2012).

A number of different labels have been developed on each of the four islands over the years;
however, the only label aligned with UNESCO’s MAB Programme is the Hiiumaa Green Label, which
was developed on Hiiumaa Island. This label is currently applied to products and product groups or
services. It is granted to those who adopt a sustainable-management approach, which enhances the
value of local nature and human resources, traditional skills and local culture (Rosenberg, 2016).

7 See https://tour.shinan.go.kr/home/tour/preservation/preservation_21?content_print=true&

21
 The label was established in 1995, since which time it has gone through several changes. It was
initially developed for the reserve’s accommodation services, to confirm to visitors that labelled
businesses were environmentally friendly.

In 2000, a new scheme was developed, whereby the label was no longer solely applicable for
accommodation services; instead, the label’s use was expanded to include products, services and
events. However, the accommodation services that were originally granted permission to use the
label can still do so.

The new scheme was introduced due to restructuring of the Biosphere Reserve Centre, which resulted
in the absence of an authority to implement the labelling scheme in relation to accommodation
services. Since its expansion, the label has been granted to a wide range of local businesses on the
island. Current labelled products and services include the following:

• Local food, e.g. meat, sausages, cheese, berries, jams, lemonade and spices;
• Local handicrafts, e.g. products made from wool, wood, clay and silk;
• Beauty products, e.g. soap, conditioners, and shampoos;
• Events and festivals, e.g. Hiiumaa Folk Music Festival and Hiiumaa Marathon. The use of the
label for events and festivals is for marketing purposes, to identify the events as green and
eco-friendly.

The label, which is owned and managed by the Hiiumaa Development Centre, is valid for three years
and can be renewed. The Hiiumaa Development Centre arranges external evaluations two or three
times a year, depending on the number of applicants.

The Hiiumaa Green Label is a patented label which is registered with the Estonian Patent Office.
Currently, there is no charge for using the label; however, plans are in place to start charging such fees
to ensure the sustainability of the labelling scheme and to help pay for marketing.

The challenge in developing a label for the West Estonian Archipelago BR was the confusion caused
to consumers due to there being so many labels in the marketplace. Furthermore, it was difficult
to implement this one label across the entire archipelago, as every island had its own development
centre. Nevertheless, in the country of Estonia as a whole, the Hiiumaa Green Label has come to be
strongly associated with the term “environmentally friendly”.

Source: Interview with Ms. Lia Rosenberg (February 5, 2018)

3.3 Criteria for Products and Services

Labelling schemes should support the function of BRs as model sites for sustainable development;
therefore, labelling criteria should be developed in accordance with BR-management principles,
considering the three interrelated BR zones defined by UNESCO: namely, the core area, buffer
zone and transition area.8 Given the function of a reserve’s core area, which is defined as a “strictly
protected ecosystem”, one essential labelling criterion must be to ensure that raw materials are
not removed from this area and that production/operational activities are not conducted within
it. Considering further the function of a BR’s buffer zone, which is used for “activities compatible
with sound ecological practices”, labelling criteria must ensure that any activities conducted
inside this zone are indeed compatible with such practices. Similarly, labelling criteria must
also support the function of a reserve’s transitional area by “fostering economic and human
development that is socio-culturally and ecologically sustainable”. 9

8 See UNESCO MAB, 2017b.

9 Ibid.

22
Furthermore, eco-label standards should provide assurances for planning and implementation
(Horne, 2009), by focusing on the life cycles of products and services. According to the
International Organization for Standardization, a life-cycle assessment (LCA) is a systematic
tool for assessing the environmental impacts associated with a product or service to build an
inventory of those inputs and outputs, and thereby identify the most significant aspects of the
system relative to the objective of the study. An LCA considers environmental impacts along the
continuum of a product’s life (i.e. cradle to grave), from the acquisition of raw materials through
production, use and disposal. The general categories of environmental impacts to consider
include resource depletion, human health and ecological consequences (Naumann, 2001).

Table 3 below presents a range of different criteria contained within the three label categories.
Label qualifications should be developed and modified based on the needs and capacity of
each biosphere reserve, together with the reserve’s existing products and services, and available
technology.

Table 3: Qualifications for Labelling

Tier 1: Tier 2: Tier 3:

BR Destination Label BR Quality Label Professional Certification
Label

Labels can only be applied to
businesses and organisations
within the BR’s geographical
boundary or other boundary
determined by a relevant
authority.
The products and services
should meet specific
qualifications that have
been decided by the BR’s
management.
Green qualifications may
include the following:10
• Local products and
services within a BR’s
geographical boundary;
• Compostable;
• Degradable;
• Designed for disassembly;
• Extended product lifetime;
• Renewable energy;
• Recovered energy;
• Reduced energy
consumption;
• Recyclable;
• Recycled content;
• Reduced resource use;
• Reduced water
consumption;
• Reusable and refillable;
• Waste reduction;
• Organically-processed
products.
The qualifications are
determined by each
professional certification
agency. For example, the
United States Department
of Agriculture’s (USDA)
Organic label requires labelled
products to fulfil the following
requirements:11
• Produced without excluded
methods (i.e. genetic
engineering), ionizing
radiation or sewage sludge;
• Produced per the National
List of Allowed and
Prohibited Substances;
• Overseen by a USDA
National Organic
Programme-authorised
certifying agent, following
all USDA organic
regulations;
• Multi-ingredient agricultural
products containing “made
with” notes must meet the
following two criteria:

10 Examples provided by the Republic of Indonesia’s Ministry of Environment and Forestry (MoEF), n.d.
11 See USDA, 2016.
23
 Ideally the products should • At least 70%
also abide by national of the product
standards, including food must be certified
standards, pharmaceutical organic ingredients
safety standards and (excluding salt and
manufacturing standards. water); and

• Any remaining
agricultural products
are not required
to be organically
produced but
must be produced
without excluded
methods (i.e. genetic
engineering).

Looking at these three categories, BR managers need to give adequate consideration when
determining criteria for the BR quality label, as it requires indicators that address issues pertinent
to the entire life cycle of products and services. It is recommended, therefore, that in the initial
phase of BR quality label development, managers should select a single product category or
service to act as a pilot project. After a specified period of time, the criteria should be reviewed
and modified as necessary (Orloczki, 2012).

In addition to these points, BR managers need to consider nine general principles of eco-labelling,
which are based on ISO 14020 certification:
• The provision of relevant, accurate, verifiable and non-deceptive information (e.g. percentage
of recycled material, recyclable packaging or product etc.);
• Eco-label criteria should not create unnecessary trade barriers;
• All claims should be supported by verifiable scientific methodology;
• Information concerning the methodology and criteria used to support eco-labels and
declarations should be made available to all interested parties;
• All relevant aspects within a product’s life cycle should be considered;
• Eco-labelling should not discourage or inhibit innovation; nor should it limit the potential to
improve environmental performance;
• Eco-labelling should be available to all manufacturers with no unduly high costs or
administrative requirements;
• Criteria should be developed openly by consensus with the participation of all relevant
stakeholders;
• Information on environmental aspects should be made available to all purchaser/consumers.
(Source: SBA, 2006)

With regards to ecotourism, the Indonesian Ecotourism Network (Indecon) has developed
several standard-based principles to ensure that all ecotourism-related products and services:

24
 • Are environmentally friendly: Activities are designed to have a minimal negative impact
upon the environment while actively contributing to conservation initiatives;
• Support local communities: Products and services should actively contribute to community
welfare and preserve local culture, while also encouraging community participation in
delivering ecotourism projects; and
• Are tourist friendly: Activities should be developed for tourists that are not only fun but also
interesting, by helping to improve people’s knowledge about the natural world as a whole,
as well as local ecosystems and cultural values.12

These principles apply to the management of ecotourism products and services in Indonesia,
including tour activities, transportation, food and beverages, tour guides and tour operators.

Box 6 provides an example from La Palma Biosphere Reserve, which is located in the Spanish
archipelago of the Canary Islands. In order to support the local economy, La Palma BR introduced
a so-called Green Economy initiative to promote the reserve’s products and services under its
own eco-brand and logo.

Box 6: Implementation of the Green Economy Initiative at La Palma BR

La Palma Biosphere Reserve, Spain

http://www.lapalmabiosfera.es/en/biosfera
T
he brand, La Palma Biosphere Worldwide Reserve, guarantees the
quality of its products and services. The label is primarily granted to
food and agricultural produce, as well as handicrafts and souvenirs that
have a cultural resonance and recreational activities, all of which help to
support the island’s economic sustainability (Lapalmabiosfera, 2014a).

Using its eco-brand and logo, La Palma BR rolled out the Green Economy
initiative, which has proved a great success in terms of promoting the
biosphere reserve’s products and services far and wide, both on the
island and beyond.

In this way, the BR’s managers have raised the reserve’s profile with regard to traditional farming
methods as well as the use of new agricultural and food production technologies. In this way, La Palma
BR not only reinforces traditional economic activities, but it also supports a new social economy
within the framework of enhancing environmental and cultural sustainability.

La Palma BR perceives the eco-label as benefiting local companies, by providing the following
advantages:
• Local products and services are identified as belonging to the brand, within the boundary of the BR
where they are produced, manufactured and/or implemented;
• The quality of the products and services are ensured, supported by “tailored” audits;
• Member businesses gain a marketing advantage, as their products and services are linked to an
internationally-recognised biosphere reserve;
• Businesses can access expert consultations;
• Businesses enjoy greater exposure for their products and services via several different promotional
channels, which include the BR’s website, trade fairs and markets; and
• Members have access to financial support (including subsidies for their annual fees).

(Source: Lapalmabiosfera, 2014a

12 See Indecon, 2017.

25
 Under the Green Economy programme, the La Palma BR brand and logo cover three distinct areas:
responsible tourism, quality certification and sustainable companies.

The BR’s quality-certification label is primarily used for agriculturally-produced food and handicrafts.

The requirements for farmers and producers who wish to apply La Palma’s brand and logo to their
food and products include using locally-sourced raw materials, applying green agricultural methods
and adhering to sustainable livestock production, as well as other sustainable activities.

Source: Email interviews with Ms. Carolina De León García (February 2, 2018, October 22, 2018 and
February 11, 2019

When developing labelling criteria, the inclusion of all local producers and business groups
should be carefully considered. Disputes may occur as a result of overly-strict criteria; therefore,
BR managers need to try, as far as possible, to anticipate any potential problems when selecting
which criteria to apply. Box 7 provides an example of labelling development from Shinan Dadohae
BR in Korea and its challenges, which drew protests from local producers whose applications to
obtain the reserve’s eco-label were refused.

Box 7: Labelling Development and its Challenges at Shinan Dadohae BR

Shinan Dadohae Biosphere Reserve, Korea

http://www.shinan.go.kr/

Shinan Dadohae BR (SDBR) created an eco-label for local products

in 2015, known as BIORE, which is an abbreviation of Brilliant, Island,
Organic, Reservation, Recreation and Restoration.

The BIORE label is granted to products contained within three specific

categories:

• Agricultural and marine products (processed products, including

souvenirs);
• Salt products;
• Natural agricultural and fresh marine products.

The primary target market for BIORE-labelled products are people living in large towns and cities, due
to the fact that, on average, the price of labelled products is considerably higher than non-labelled
products – up to 1.5 times higher, in some cases.

The most famous product that comes from within SDBR is salt, which is sold in Seoul and exported
to Japan.

The BIORE label, which is owned and funded by the local authority in Shinan County, is only offered
to SDBR products and services whose raw materials are 100% sourced from within the reserve’s
boundary and that also meet certain quality and environmental standards. The label may also be used
by private groups and foundations. Moreover, there is no fee to apply for the label.

SDBR’s management undertakes a two-step process before awarding the BIORE label to new
businesses that wish to use it. The first of these steps is a pre-evaluation conducted by Shinan County
to review all submitted applications.

26
 Thereafter, Shinan County officials evaluate each of the applicants by implementing unannounced
spot-checks at the premises of the producers and businesses in question. If use of the BIORE label is
granted, it takes approximately 60 days to complete the registration process. The label is valid for two
years, after which time it can be renewed following a thorough re-evaluation.

Even when use of the label has been granted, there are certain circumstances in which it may be
withdrawn:

• If a producer or business fails to comply with the predetermined labelling criteria and standards;
• If it is found that a producer or business is using fake certification;
• If a business ceases to operate or it relocates to another area outside the SDBR’s boundary;
• If a business fails to comply with recommendations issued by Shinan County officials.

Since its introduction in 2015, a number of producers and business owners have sought permission
to use the BIORE label. However, due to the very strict criteria imposed by Shinan County, some
producers failed to obtain BIORE certification, which led to disputes between the producers and
Shinan County authorities. In some cases, unsuccessful applicants compared their operational
and production practices with producers who had been granted use of the label, resulting in angry
demonstrations outside the Shinan County office.

Source: Interview with Kyong-O Moon (March 3, 2018)

3.4 Evaluating the Use of Labels

Once eco-labelling criteria have been set, BR managers need to develop a method of evaluation
to ensure that each label’s requirements are met by all the businesses and organisations applying
it to their products/services. Such evaluations, which should be conducted periodically, are
necessary not only to guarantee the quality and credibility of a label’s status but also to monitor
each member organisation’s continuing compliance with the label’s predetermined criteria and
accepted practices.

As the BR destination label does not possess any specific criteria, there is no formal evaluation
method to be applied. However, it is advisable for BR managers to ensure that all labelled products
and services are locally produced in order to maintain the label’s positive image. With regards
to a BR quality label, however, BR managers need to decide upon a specific evaluation method.
In the case of professional certification labels, meanwhile, respective methods of evaluation
are determined by different external certification agencies. In general, all labels should ensure
the continuity and consistency of their respective businesses and organisations in producing,
delivering and recycling their end products in a sustainable way. Moreover, evaluation methods
should be chosen and developed in a transparent manner, with the full participation of all relevant
stakeholders, to agree upon the most suitable scheme according to the local context in which
each particular biosphere reserve is located.

27
 Table 4: Eco-labelling Evaluation Methods

Tier 1: Tier 2: Tier 3:

BR Destination Label BR Quality Label Professional Certification
Label

Since the label can be
used by all businesses
and organisations with no
minimum requirements,
BR managers only need to
undertake minimal evaluation
procedures.
Specific evaluation indicators
need to be determined
to ensure the quality and
environmental standards of
labelled products; indicators
can cover a range of different
aspects, including the origin of
raw materials and production
processes, for instance.
If no specific evaluation
standards exist, conducting a
peer review may be an option.
Each professional certification
agency has its own evaluation
and assessment method.
The certification agency
may consider additional
assessment requirements,
such as those relating to BR
Quality Label criteria, during
the evaluation process.

All evaluation assessments

must be documented and
recorded for future reference.
All evaluations must consider
the entire life cycle of the
products and services being
evaluated.

3.5 Label Ownership and Management

Biosphere reserve eco-labels should be owned and managed by BR management bodies and/
or relevant authorities. However, the requisite management structure will differ according to the
category of label applied. For instance, in the case of BR destination labels, reserve managers
can create a logo and grant permission to businesses and organisations to use the label with
minimal requirements. In the case of BR quality labels, however, BR managers have additional
responsibilities in terms of developing standard-based criteria and a monitoring and evaluation
(M&E) scheme. Hence, the committee working on BR quality-label programmes should involve
experts from different product and service categories to help guide their efforts. Additionally,
producers and business groups may form cooperatives to put forward their ideas during different
stages, such as the development, implementation and ongoing management of a label – as in
the case of Lake Tana BR.

Some commentators maintain that one essential factor behind the success of an eco-labelling
programme is the implementation of a marketing campaign (Charter et al., 2001; Blahy and
Peil, 2010). Therefore, BR managers need to be prepared to develop a marketing strategy to
help guarantee that the label is widely recognised and effectively implemented. Securing (local)
government support and, where possible, active involvement in an eco-labelling programme will
also help to increase awareness and improve its chances of being accepted.

The type of ownership and management required for each category of eco-label is presented in
Table 5.

28
 Table 5: Eco-labelling Ownership and Management

Tier 1: Tier 2: Tier 3:

BR Destination Label BR Quality Label Professional Certification
Label

The label is owned by a BR The eco-label is owned The professional certification

management body and/or
relevant authority.
and endorsed by a BR
management body and/or
relevant authority, with eco-
labelling criteria established
with the active participation of
experts.
Verification and M&E on the
implementation of eco-label
requirements and procedures
are essential.
In addition, a transparent and
inclusive process should be
established by involving a
range of representatives from
producers and private firms.
label is owned and
endorsed by a separate
entity. Verification and
M&E are carried out by the
respective label’s professional
certification organisation.
Partnerships should be
established between BR
management bodies and
selected professional
certification organisations to
coordinate the parallel use
of BR destination and/or BR
quality labelling in the same
programme.

A range of biosphere reserves in Indonesia (Box 8) and the Cat Ba BR in Vietnam (Box 9)
provide examples of branding strategy and the wide range of stakeholders that can be involved
in BR management. Eco-labelling practice at Cat Ba BR shows that one of the keys to the
successful implementation of a labelling scheme is to engage and coordinate with all relevant
stakeholders. Cibodas BR, also in Indonesia (Box 10), highlights the commitment shown by the
local government to engage with a wide range of stakeholders, including representatives from
universities and local community groups, in implementing the reserve’s labelling scheme.

29
 Box 8: Branding Strategy at Indonesian BRs

Indonesian Biosphere Reserves

http://tntakabonerate.com/id/
https://www.gedepangrango.org/

Indonesia currently has 11 biosphere reserves, covering a total area

of more than 15 million hectares (ha.). Indonesia’s BR-development
programme can be divided into three main categories: Conservation,
Community Development and Research & Development. In addition,
Branding and Development of new BRs is also carried out.

The development of product branding is intended to provide added value

to products sourced from and/or produced within each of the biosphere
reserve areas. By drawing on the internationally-prestigious status of
UNESCO World Biosphere Reserve to promote them, biosphere reserve
products can help to improve the quality of life and living standards for
local communities living in and around the BRs.

In Indonesia, there are two key approaches for branding products from
the country’s different biosphere reserves:

1. Strengthening each BR’s identity by establishing and promoting

individual logos; and
2. Branding BR products for sale in local communities, the private
sector, cottage industries, tourism etc.

As part of this branding strategy, the Indonesian Institute of Sciences (Lembaga Ilmu Pengetahuan
Indonesia – LIPI) launched Branding Guidelines for Products from Indonesian Biosphere Reserves in
December 2016. These guidelines contain branding and labelling requirements/criteria for products
and services in Indonesian BRs. It should be noted, however, that the requirements included in the
guidelines are essentially voluntary, meaning that producers and retailers can choose whether or not
to apply for a label for their products. A range of targets for further branding development include food
products, farms, plantations, beverages, crafts and horticulture, as well ecosystem services such as
natural resources, ecotourism and carbon trading. Products and/or services may use a particular
reserve’s brand/label as long as they meet the following requirements:

1. Products may be produced within a BR’s geographical boundary and/or from the reserve’s
surrounding areas; however, processing and packaging must be conducted within the BR’s
boundary;
2. Products must not harm the environment, either during their manufacture, use or disposal (i.e. all
products must be eco-friendly);
3. Products should be produced in accordance with production permits issued by relevant local
authorities;
4. Products must meet existing quality standards. For products that are produced by local micro and
small enterprises, they must fulfil quality standards associated with the relevant industrial, trade or
agricultural agency. However, products that are produced by medium and large enterprises must
meet the requirements set forth by the Indonesian National Standard (SNI) certification mark;
5. Products should be wrapped in standard packaging; and
6. Products must be sustainable, with the potential for long-term development.

Sources:
UNESCO, Indonesia Country Report 2016-2017
Indonesian Institute of Sciences (LIPI), Branding Guidelines for Products from Indonesian Biosphere
Reserves, 2016

30
 Box 9: A Wide Range of Stakeholders at Cat Ba BR

Cat Ba Biosphere Reserve, Vietnam

http://catba.net.vn/introduction-to-management/?lang=en

After being designated a UNESCO Biosphere Reserve in 2004, Cat Ba BR

(CBBR) launched an official regional quality-certification label and logo
for eco-friendly products and services in 2011. The initiative, which was
developed by the Haiphong Department of Culture, Sports and Tourism
together with technical support from UNESCO’s MAB Programme, aimed
to create a range of premium “green” consumer goods and services that
carry the CBBR logo, thereby reinforcing the principle of “conservation
for development, development for conservation” across the region’s
tourist industry and product-supply chain (UNESCO, 2011).

It was also hoped that the labelling programme would create more employment opportunities for
local people and provide added value by generating a sense of pride among local communities and
fostering social cohesion. The label has proved to be particularly rewarding for local businesses that
promote conservation, green economic development and the values of social enterprise (ASC, 2016).

By 2018, 25 local businesses had been granted with the CBBR certification label. Certification is
granted after assessing a business’ environmental credentials; safety and hygiene standards; their
contribution to the local economy and support for community development; the maintenance of the
local landscape and cultural values, as well as compliance with national industry standards. CBBR-
certified products and services cover a wide range of industries and include everything from fish
sauce and honey to tourist boats and boating excursions, as well as tourist entertainment areas and
tourist facilities (e.g. hotels, resorts and restaurants). The CBBR label has also been granted to two
community businesses working in the ecotourism sector: Mangrove Community-Ecotourism in Phu
Long Commune and the Tran Chau Cave Café.

Figure 6: CBBR certification on display at Princes Hotel on Cat Ba Island

Label users also benefit from public relations support via websites, as well as news and media
coverage. According to CBBR Secretary, Mr. Lê Thanh Tuyên, people prefer to buy labelled products as
opposed to non-labelled products. Furthermore, the label offers benefits to certified local businesses
as they can link up with other domestic as well as international BR partners and markets through the
worldwide BR network.

The implementation of the label is monitored and renewed annually by Cat Ba’s BR Management
Board, which owns the label. The BR Management Board is headed up by the Vice Chairman of
the Haiphong People’s Committee and three deputy heads (i.e. the Director of the Department of
Agriculture and Rural Development, the Director of the Department of Culture, Sports and Tourism,
and the Chairman of the Cat Hai People’s Committee).

31
 Other members of the management board comprise representatives from the two departments
referred to above plus several other relevant agencies and departments, encompassing areas such
as planning and investment, finance, science and technology, natural resources and the environment,
construction, and foreign affairs as well as the Institute of Marine Environment and Resources (IMER)
and the Cat Ba National Park (Tanaka, 2018).

Labelled businesses have also formed a BR Label Enterprise Association to coordinate amongst
themselves. Options are currently being explored to potentially involve this association in the CBBR
label’s monitoring and verification process in the future.

Source: Email interview with Mr. Lê Thanh Tuyên (February 6, 2018)

Box 10: Local Government Support for Sustainable Development at Cibodas BR

Cibodas Biosphere Reserve, Indonesia

https://www.gedepangrango.org/

Cibodas BR, which is located in Indonesia’s West Java province, was designated
a biosphere reserve in 1977 and solely managed by the authorities of Gunung
Gede Pangrango National Park (GGPNP). In 2012, the BR’s transition area
was extended, and the reserve’s management was transferred to the so-
called Cibodas BR Forum, which was established in accordance with a 2010
decree issued by the West Java governor. The gubernatorial decree provides
a mandate to the local municipality to work as the forum’s secretariat. Forum
members include officials from the national government (GGPNP and Cibodas
Botanical Garden staff) as well as provincial and local governments, together
with representatives from universities, NGOs and local community groups.

As part of its role, the Cibodas BR Forum has established an Integrated Management Plan, which
provides managerial directives on all activities conducted within the BR’s core area, buffer zone and
transition area. The forum also promotes the creation of sustainable livelihoods for members of local
communities through branding and ecotourism.

The forum introduced an eco-labelling scheme to cover agricultural produce and ecotourist
accommodation. Farmers and ecotourism service providers are permitted to use the label with the
Cibodas BR logo for free if their products/services fulfil all of the following criteria:
1. Proposals to use the label should be submitted to the Cibodas BR Forum;
2. Products/services must be produced/delivered within Cibodas BR’s boundary;
3. Local people must make up at least 50% of a business’ workforce, to support community
development and the local economy;
4. All agricultural methods and ecotourist activities must be eco-friendly;
5. All activities within the BR should promote conservation and environmental education;
6. If a business already has certification from another source, that certification will have priority.
Examples include certification from the district trade and industry agency, organic certification, or
Halal certification issued by the Indonesian Ulema Council (MUI); and
7. All products and services must be monitored and verified by the Cibodas BR Forum.

Currently, several products and services use the Cibodas BR label. These include organic vegetables
grown by the Mandiri farming group, organic soaps produced by Kartini cottage industry and dried
instant noodles produced by Indung Nyalindung cottage industry. The BR’s brand has also been
granted to the Edelweiss Cooperative, which runs environmentally-friendly guesthouses, and Sangga
Buana Resort and Convention Hotel, which adheres to strict principles on environmental conservation.

Source: Interview with Mr. Ade Bagja Hidayat, plus findings from Cibodas BR site visit by Dr. Tanaka
(January 22-25, 2018)

32
3.6 Funding
Funds for the development of BR eco-labels can be obtained from a variety of different sources,
which include (local) governments, NGOs, or other entities generating income within a biosphere
reserve’s geographical area. For BR destination labelling, funding is primarily required for creating
a logo and developing a marketing strategy to promote the label. For BR quality labelling, however,
additional funds will be needed to establish robust verification and M&E schemes to ensure the
quality of labelled products and/or services is maintained.

In his study of eco-labels, Horne (2009) refers to self-funded voluntary eco-labelling schemes
that can suffer from poor or slow processes and resulting declines in reputation. Therefore,
before launching an eco-label, it is important to ensure the availability of sufficient budget funds
as well as to determine the source(s) of ongoing funding for the years ahead, which might include
membership fees, government or NGO funding, or other relevant activities that can generate
income for a BR.

Based on the experience of Germany’s internationally-known professional certification label,

Blue Angel, significant financial resources are required to market and publicise a new label, as
well as to compensate for a lack of visibility, as the label will not be able to communicate all the
information about itself purely by being seen on a supermarket shelf. In the case of Blue Angel,
the label profited from free reporting by journalists and implementing joint public relations
activities (Muller, 2002).

Table 6 presents the different levels of funding required for each of the three labelling categories,
plus the potential for raising funds through each label category’s membership fees. It should
be noted that the term membership applies to those businesses that have been granted the
necessary authorisation to use an eco-label.

33
 Table 6: Tier-based Labelling Costs and Associated Membership Fees
Tier 1:
BR Destination Label
REQUIRED FUNDING
• Initial funding to create a BR
destination logo;
• Possible additional
marketing costs to publicise
and raise awareness about
the BR.
MEMBERSHIP & ASSOCIATED FEES
No membership fee is
applicable.
34
Tier 2:
BR Quality Label
• Initial funding to create a BR
quality logo;
• Promotional expenses for
BR products and services;
• Budget to cover verification
costs;
• Budget to cover the costs of
M&E, to ensure the quality
of labelled products and
services is maintained.
Membership should include
periodic renewal based
on reassessment and re-
evaluation;
BR management can choose
whether or not to apply
membership fees for the
use of a BR quality label. If a
membership fee is applied,
the amount charged for the
label application and renewal
should ideally be based on a
business’ profile and revenue,
and the size of the business.
Tier 3:
Professional Certification
Label
The following funding is
required for the parallel
costs associated with a BR
destination or BR quality label
in addition to a professional
certification label:
• Initial funding to create a
BR destination or BR quality
logo;
• Promotional expenses for
BR products and services;
• Budget to cover M&E, to
ensure the quality of labelled
products and services is
maintained;
• Potential coordination funds
required, if a partnership
scheme is established
Any membership scheme
follows the respective
professional certification
programme being applied.
Businesses and organisations
can also apply to use a BR
destination or BR quality
label during the professional
certification’s prevailing
membership period.
3.7 Logo Use
The logos used on biosphere reserve eco-labels are independently designed by each BR to deliver
certain messages and images. An instruction manual relating to a BR’s chosen logo should
ideally be created and made available to ensure that the logo is used properly. Table 7 presents
the different terms of use associated with each category of logo, together with recommended
general principles on using logos.

Table 7: Logo Terms of Use and Recommended General Principles

Tier 1: Tier 2: Tier 3:

BR Destination Label BR Quality Label Professional Certification
Label

TERMS OF LOGO USE

The label’s permission
applies to all products and
services and may involve
certain approval procedures
with either minimal or no
requirements. Period of
logo use may or may not be
regulated.
The label’s permission, which
is granted for a particular
length of time, applies
to specific products and
services that are judged by BR
managers as fulfilling certain
requirements. The period of
logo use may be renewed after
re-evaluation.
The label’s permission applies
to specific products and
services during a prevailing
period determined by the
professional certification
agency. Therefore, all terms
and conditions depend on
the respective professional
certification agency.

RECOMMENDED GENERAL PRINCIPLES

• A logo should be clear, and its proportions should be adjusted in accordance with the size of the
product(s) on which it appears. The logo should not be oversized and should not hide product
information;
• Modification of the logo in any form other than the official design as determined by BR
management shall not be allowed. Users can only use the official colours, letters and pictures for
the label;
• Product features and specifications, such as type, quantity, ingredients and other facts, should be
specified and properly labelled on product packages;
• There should be no pictures or words written over a BR’s logo.
• A BR logo can be applied to a verified product as well as the product’s associated promotional
materials;
• The logo’s placement should not mislead consumers. An example offered by the EU Ecolabel is:
“[Do] not place a sticker with the EU Ecolabel logo onto permanent soap dispensers [if you wish] to
communicate that the soap is awarded the EU Ecolabel. Since EU Ecolabel soap pouches display
the logo and license number, it is possible to communicate that the soap is awarded the EU
Ecolabel by installing clear soap dispensers;”
• The UNESCO and MAB logos should not be applied in conjunction with any labelling scheme, as
UNESCO and the MAB Programme do not provide a global policy on labelling; moreover, the use of
these logos is not intended for commercial purposes

35
 Below are a few examples of logo use, taken from the Georgian Bay Biosphere Reserve’s brand
guidelines.

(Source: GBBR, n.d.)

Figure 7: Examples from Georgian Bay BR Brand Guidelines

36
Source: GBBR, n.d.)
Figure 7 (contd.): Examples from Georgian Bay BR Brand Guidelines

37
 4.0 Eco-labelling for Biosphere Reserve Ecotourism
In recent years, global tourism has been a rapidly growing business sector. In 2016, travel
and tourism directly contributed USD 2.3 trillion to the global economy and was responsible
for the creation of 109 million jobs around the world. The indirect impact of this burgeoning
sector contributed USD 7.6 trillion to the global economy and supported 292 million jobs, which
respectively equal 10.2 percent of the world’s gross domestic product (GDP) and approximately
1 in 10 of all jobs worldwide (World Travel and Tourism Council, 2017).

Asia and the Pacific outperformed all world regions in terms of tourism growth between 2005 and
2015, with arrivals increasing by an average of 6 percent per year, compared to the international
average of 4 percent. The region recorded 6 percent growth in international arrivals in 2015,
which amounted to an additional 15 million tourists compared with the previous year, making it
the sixth year of consistently robust growth (World Tourism Organization, 2016).

Along with increasing its share in the economic sector, particularly in exports, tourism has
contributed to climate change, for example through higher energy and water consumption from
growing accommodation facilities. This suggests the need to shift towards more environmentally-
friendly approaches, which require significant effort and financial outlay. One of the most cost-
effective ways to enhance the efforts of a tourism business becoming more sustainable is by
awarding it an eco-label (Orloczki, 2012).

Eco-labelling – which has been available in the tourist industry for over 30 years – can, in theory,
assist industry suppliers in the adoption of environmentally-sustainable practices (Mihalic, 2000,
in Karlsson and Dolnicar, 2015). It is an attempt to protect natural capital through improvements
to existing environmental standards within the industry (Sasidharan et al., 2001). A range of
reasons has been identified that explain why tourism providers choose to join eco-labelling
schemes; they include their interest in protecting the environment and improving relationships
with local communities, as well as wider public relations benefits (Bohdanowicz, 2006; Kirk,
1998; Rowe & Higham, 2007, in Karlsson and Dolnicar, 2015).

In developing countries, tourism is often built in and around sensitive ecosystems (Butler,
1990). The eco-labelling concept would be highly sought-after by tourist-related businesses
in developing countries, as it would help them meet governmental pressure to improve
environmental performance by adopting effective and tangible environmental management
strategies (Zhang, et al., 1999). However, the financial costs of obtaining an eco-label are usually
high.

The high costs of securing an eco-label has led to concerns among tourism service providers
(Bramwell and Alletorp, 2001, in Karlsson and Dolnicar, 2015); it is especially challenging for
smaller operators in the industry (Sasidharan et al., 2002). Therefore, it is recommended that
eco-labelling schemes should encompass various sizes of business and enable the inclusion of
all players in the industry by considering the interests and capacity of each stakeholder.

Across the tourist industry, eco-labels can be applied to a range of different tourism enterprises,

38
such as hotels/resorts/marinas, travel agencies, tour operators, ground and water transportation
services, and airlines; they may also be extended to certify the environmental soundness of
particular tourist destinations and the natural resources at those destinations (UNEP, 1998;
Mihalic, 2000, in Sasidharan et al., 2002). At the West Estonian Archipelago BR, the label is also
applied to events and festivals, including an annual Folk Music Festival and marathon.

Davis (1997) in Sasidharan et al. (2002) divided tourism-related eco-labelling into six steps, as
laid out in Figure 8:

Figure 8: The Six Steps of Tourism’s Eco-labelling Process

According to eco-labelling programmes in the tourist industry, the environmental impacts

resulting during the entire tourism life cycle should be assessed. However, given the degree of
dependence by the tourist industry on a multitude of different resources, it is difficult to apply life-
cycle assessments to identify the entire scale, magnitude and range of environmental impacts
generated by tourism businesses. Therefore, eco-label authorities need to be aware of the full
range of impacts (including scale and magnitude) that are produced by various stakeholders in
the industry before conducting impact-analysis and improvement-analysis phases of life-cycle
assessments (Sasidharan et al., 2002).

39
 It should be noted that life cycles relating to tourism services are different from the life cycles
of products. Thus, it is rather challenging to state a given impact of a particular kind of service
on the environment. However, some international labels have successfully defined criteria and
standards to be applied to tourism services, such as the EU Ecolabel (or EU Flower) eco-labelling
scheme (Ryglova, 2007).

Karlsson and Dolnicar (2015) maintain that there is a niche segment that genuinely cares about
eco-certification, and how it affects their purchase decisions. Similarly, according to Sasidharan
et al. (2001), the promotion and achievement of internationally-recognised environmental
awards can be an instrument for tourism enterprises in developing countries to market their
services to high-spending, environmentally-conscious Western tourists.

Ecotourism can attract tourists with higher-than-average environmental awareness, who are
likely to want to purchase products and services that are sustainably produced. In developing
countries, where local purchasing power is low, the emergence of eco-tourists opens up a new
market for local, eco-friendly products and services.

Based on interviews carried out at Lake Tana BR in Ethiopia, locals expressed the fact that
although they are proud of their local products, their purchasing power is low; thus, the reserve’s
eco-labelled products are primarily targeted to tourists and consumers in the in nearby capital
city, who are usually willing and able to pay more for environmentally-friendly products. Similarly,
managers at Rhön BR in Germany confirm that the region’s eco-label has helped to strengthen
local SMEs, particularly when local tourist markets are open for business.

Over the next few pages, three case studies are presented that look at BR eco-labelling schemes
that have been applied to local ecotourism services. The first of these (Box 11) describes the
implementation of tourism-related eco-labels at La Palma BR in the Canary Islands, showing
how eco-labels can be used as a tool to promote sustainable and responsible tourism. Box 12
presents an example from Shinan Dadohae BR in Korea, which shows how the reserve’s BIORE
eco-label has successfully been linked to ecotourism activities in the region. And finally, the
way in which ecotourism can help generate and support livelihoods in developing countries is
explored in Box 13, with the case of Palawan BR in the Philippines.

40
 Box 11: Ecotourism Labelling at La Palma BR

La Palma Biosphere Reserve, Spain

http://www.lapalmabiosfera.es/en/biosfera

As part of its Green Economy programme, the La Palma

BR brand offers three labels that cater for different areas:
responsible tourism, quality certification and sustainable
companies.

The responsible tourism label was borne out of a desire to

create an environmentally-friendly tourist destination, involving
a wide range of stakeholders, which would not only help to
minimise environmental degradation in the region but would
also promote a more efficient use of natural resources and be
a driving force for local economic growth, by creating jobs and
safeguarding local people’s welfare.

The requirements for applying the responsible tourism label

include:

• Promoting High-quality Tourism

Good quality tourist services constitute one of the most important aspects to meet the needs
and expectations of visitors. Therefore, La Palma BR expects excellence across all of its tourist
establishments, amenities and resources that together make up the reserve’s tourism product
range.
• Themed Tourism
One of the main attractions for tourists, and the thing that will help to encourage them to return,
is the provision of a wide variety of different types of accommodation and products from which
to choose.
• Ensuring Well-maintained Tourism Resources
In order to keep the quality of tourism services at a high level, it is essential to conserve and
maintain all destination sites and resources to a high standard, as well as guaranteeing a high
level of security at all times.

La Palma BR works closely with specialist tourism service providers and together they have been
promoting a range of alternatives to support sustainable and responsible tourism. Spain has
introduced a new brand covering tourism-related “product clubs” for use across the entire network
of biosphere reserves and other tourist destinations as part of its Spanish Tourism Plan Horizon
2020, which promotes learning and appreciation of natural heritage from a sustainable development
perspective. One of the key aims of the Horizon 2020 initiative is to enable local businesses to become
more competitive in the international marketplace.

In conjunction with the Responsible Tourism Institute (RTI) and the UN’s World Tourism Organization
(UNWTO), La Palma BR has developed a series of sustainability strategies for the tourism sector, to
avoid potentially negative effects resulting from economic activities on the island (Lapalmabiosfera,
2014b).

The eco-friendly Empresa Amiga label can be used by local businesses or commercial entities that
work in a socially and/or environmentally responsible way, by for instance implementing waste
segregation or energy-efficient practices within their business operations.

La Palma BR’s responsible tourism label has not yet secured a partnership with any professional
certification agency. However, the label does recognise third-party certification to guarantee the origin
and/or quality of products and services; one example of such third-party certification is the DOP
(Denominación de Origen Protegida - Protected Designation of Origin) mark.

41
 Producers and/or businesses that have the DOP seal – or another third-party eco-label - are more likely
to secure a successful assessment when applying for the La Palma BR label. Moreover, producers
and businesses that have both third-party and La Palma certification can apply for a subsidy towards
their third-party certification fees.

Source: Email interviews with Ms. Carolina De León García (February 2, 2018, October 22, 2018 and
February 2, 2019)

Box 12: Ecotourism Labelling at Shinan Dadohae BR

Shinan Dadohae Biosphere Reserve, Korea

http://www.shinan.go.kr/

Shinan Dadohae BR’s eco-labelling scheme also extends to ecotourism.

The use of the reserve’s BIORE label for ecotourism is fully supported by
the Shinan County authority, which facilitates labelled ecotourist sites to
be publicised on road signs and information boards, as well as through
ecotourism packages.

Shinan County is committed to supporting the BIORE eco-label by

promoting the biosphere reserve’s products in local hotels and resorts.
A dedicated souvenir shop selling eco-labelled products is also available
within the SDBR.

©Shinan County ©Shinan County

Figure 9: A road sign and information board publicise BIORE-labelled ecotourism sites

Each of the reserve’s ecotourism tour packages includes visiting the souvenir shop. There are two
packages available: one with two days and one night, and the other three days and two nights. Both
are all-inclusive deals, which include transport from Seoul, accommodation, tours and full board.
The ecotourism programme was initiated by local NGOs, which were provided with the necessary
authorisation by Shinan County. All employees involved in providing the tour services are local people.
The strong link between the region’s ecotourism and the eco-label was made possible due to the
lengthy preparations in establishing SDBR’s eco-label; during the label’s development, the BR’s
managers spent five years engaging and coordinating with all relevant stakeholders before the final
eco-labelling regulation was issued.

During this preparatory period, BR managers met as often as possible with local residents, as they
wished the label’s criteria to be developed primarily from local knowledge based on experience, as
opposed to theoretical knowledge. This bottom-up approach in developing SDBR’s eco-labelling
scheme helped to encourage local people to contribute towards its successful implementation, which
in turn has helped to boost local incomes and the local economy.

Source: Interview with Kyong-O Moon (March 3, 2018)

42
 Box 13: Ecotourism Labelling at Palawan BR

Palawan Biosphere Reserve, Philippines

http://palawanbr.pcsd.gov.ph/

Palawan Biosphere Reserve in the Philippines covers the entire

archipelagic province of Palawan, which encompasses an area of
almost 1.2 million hectares.

Figure 10: The reserve’s website promotes several tourist attractions

A 2016 UNESCO study documented how alternative livelihoods tied to ecotourism are generated
and managed, and how they are beneficial to host communities within Palawan Biosphere Reserve.
The study, which looked at six ecotourism sites in Palawan’s capital city, Puerto Princesa, showed
that the local community benefited both directly and indirectly from ecotourism, as entrepreneurs,
service providers or employees (Pontillas, Leon, & Fuentes, 2016).

The research further confirmed that the creation or development of a market niche for (new)
sustainable goods and services was evident at the sites studied, particularly at the Puerto Princesa
Underground River tour. This educational tour has become a prime tourist attraction, unique to
Palawan BR, which appeals to almost all segments of nature-based and ecotourism markets
(Pontillas, Leon, & Fuentes, 2016). It is worth noting that the Puerto Princesa Underground River is
located within the Puerto Princesa Subterranean River National Park, a UNESCO World Heritage site.

In the image below, the logo of the Puerto Princesa Subterranean River National Park 1971 (left) and
the logo for the city of Puerto Princesa (right) are displayed on a tourist sign board.

43
 5.0 Summary
When we look at the information provided in each of the case studies, we can conclude that
developing an eco-labelling scheme in biosphere reserves in Asia and the Pacific is challenging
and, in many cases, can take several years to establish. Moreover, some sites may lack the
required capacity and/or resources to develop and implement an eco-labelling scheme. Despite
these challenges, eco-labelling can offer many benefits, both for the BR itself as well as for
local communities living in and around the reserve, as it promotes local economic and social
development together with environmental sustainability, which strengthens a BR’s function to be
a model for sustainable development.

This document has explored a number of the benefits that can be gained from implementing an
eco-labelling programme. These include the following:

• For producers and services providers

Securing eco-labels for their products and services improves the image of local producers
and service providers, as an eco-label certifies that they care about producing and delivering
high-quality products/services, while at the same time enhancing and safeguarding
environmental sustainability. Additionally, producers and service providers can obtain
different methods of support through an eco-labelling scheme, in the form of collective
marketing, for instance, or via the creation of a platform that can provide a strong network
to help their businesses grow.

• For biosphere reserves

Eco-labelling increases the visibility of a BR by communicating the reserve’s values
and principles to a wide range of target audiences, both in and around the BR as well
as further afield, including potential tourists. Well-known labelled products and services
automatically promote the biosphere reserve, while eco-labelling also helps to strengthen
the local economy by supporting local livelihoods. Well-developed eco-labelling schemes
also help to ensure that BR resources are better monitored and more responsibly utilised.

• For consumers
Eco-labels enable consumers to choose environmentally-friendly products and services,
thereby enforcing the idea that consumers are entitled to make well-informed decisions.
Eco-labelling is also effective in raising consumers’ awareness about biosphere reserves,
the origin of products and services, and the importance of environmental protection and
sustainability.

44
 Which Label
is Right for
My BR?

This document has presented information about three different types of labelling schemes, to
allow biosphere reserve managers to select the one that would best meet their specific needs
and capacity. The schemes have been presented throughout according to three tiers: (1) BR
destination label; (2) BR quality label; and (3) professional certification label.

• Tier-1 destination labels are suitable for BRs that have limited resources, but which aim to
increase their visibility and raise people’s awareness about their reserves;

• Tier-2 quality labels are suitable for BRs that aim to promote local environmentally-friendly
products and services, which are specifically associated with their respective reserve;

• Tier-3 professional certification labels are primarily aimed at BRs that wish to promote
local environmentally-friendly products and services that are verified by a third-party
professional certification agency. This scheme promotes BR visibility far beyond immediate
geographical boundaries via the agency’s logo.

As this document of eco-labelling good practices has shown, eco-labels can be applied to a
wide range of products and services that are sourced, produced and delivered within BRs.
Labelled products may include any number of items that are contained within the following
categories: agriculture and horticulture, fisheries, processed food, handicrafts, and food and
beverages. For services, eco-labels can be applied to accommodation, transportation and
tourism management, which can include destination management, tour agencies, local guides
and tourist activities. Given the variety of different categories and the fact that each product and
service will have different criteria and standards attached to them, BR managers are advised to
select a few products or services for inclusion in a pilot project when developing an eco-labelling
programme. Thereafter, when the labelling scheme is fully established, additional products and
services can be introduced.

With good management and solid legislation in place, plus strong support from all relevant
stakeholders, eco-labelling is an efficient tool that enables BRs to promote and enhance
environmental sustainability while also strengthening local socio-economic development.
Moreover, as a biosphere reserve becomes more well-known, the visibility of its associated
products and services is also enhanced, which is mutually beneficial for both the BR and its
stakeholders.

45
 “A BR should always recognise the people behind the businesses, which is very
important when there are small and family-run businesses. The key to maintaining a
good relationship is to listen, to learn, to regulate, and to be in contact with them to make
sure they are doing well, and they have the tools to work well. Therefore, there should be
committed people who visit the companies and dedicate their time to them. In the case
of labelling, quality is better than quantity.”
(Carolina De León García, La Palma BR, 2018)

“A new BR usually wants to establish an eco-label within a short period of time. However,
it takes a lot of time and effort to create a BR labelling scheme; it can take five to 10 years
to develop. BR managers need to meet local residents as often as possible because
[labelling] criteria should be based on indigenous knowledge, rather than academic,
theoretical knowledge. A bottom-up process in creating the scheme will make local
people accept it. It should be noted that a labelling scheme is a sensitive issue for local
people, as it directly relates to their income.”
(Kyong-O Moon, Shinan Dadohae BR, 2018)

46
6.0 Bibliography
ASC (Assist Social Capital). (2016). Social Capital for Sustaining MAB Actions: Cat Ba
Archipelago Biosphere Reserve, Vietnam - An example of Good Practice for
Biosphere Reserves.

Blahy, B., & Peil, J. D. (2010). Regional Branding as an Instrument for Sustainable,
Environmentally-friendly Development - The “Prüfzeichen” of the biosphere reserve
Schorfheide-Chorin. TEEBcase.

Boesch, M., Renner, E., & Siegrist, D. (2008). “Brandscaping”: From traditional cultural
landscapes to”Label regions”. (Mountain Research and Development 28(2): 100-
104 ed.).

Butler, R. (1990). Alternative tourism: Pious hope or Trojan Horse? Journal of Travel
Research 28, 40-45.

Cat Ba BR. (2015). About Cat Ba Biosphere Reserve Eco-Label. Retrieved January 3,
2018, from Cat Ba Biosphere Reserve Eco-Label Official Facebook Page

Dannenbaum, M. a. (2015). Biosphere Reserves in Germany: In touch with nature.

Berlin: Europarc Deutschland e.V.

EC (European Commission). (2016). EU Ecolabel Work Plan for 2016-2018. Version

1.4. Retrieved December 7, 2017, from http://ec.europa.eu/environment/
ecolabel/documents/Work%20plan%202016-2018.pdf

EC (European Commission). (2017). EU Ecolabel Logo Guidelines. Retrieved January

17, 2018, from http://ec.europa.eu/environment/ecolabel/documents/logo_
guidelines.pdf

FAO (Food and Agricultural Organization of the United Nations). (2011). Why Invest in
Sustainable Mountain Development? Rome, Italy: FAO.

Forlin, V. (2015). How Competition Determines the Success of an Eco-Label.

Gallastegui, I. G. (2002). The use of eco-labels: a review of the literature. Wiley

InterScience 12, 316-331.

GBBR (Georgian Bay Biosphere Reserve). (n.d.). Brand Guidelines. Retrieved September
28, 2017, from https://www.gbbr.ca/download/branding_documents/Brand%20
Guidelines.pdf

Ghazoul, J., Garcia, C., & G., K. C. (2009). Landscape Labelling: A Concept for Next-
Generation Payment for Ecosystem Services Schemes. (Forest Ecology and
Management 259: 1889-1895 ed.).

Government of the Republic of Estonia. (n.d.). Mahemärgi etalonkirjelduse ning

väljaandmise tingimuste ja kasutamise korra kehtestamine. Retrieved January 9,
2018, from https://www.riigiteataja.ee/akt/74444#

47
 Horne, R. (2009). Limits to labels: The role of eco-labels in the assessment of product
sustainability and routes to sustainable consumption. (Internaional Journal of
Consumer Studies 33, 175-182 ed.).

IISD. (n.d.). Benefits of eco-labeling. Retrieved January 17, 2018, from https://www.iisd.
org/business/markets/eco_label_benefits.aspx

Indecon. (2017). Standar di Produk. Retrieved February 27, 2018, from http://www.
indecon.or.id/standar-di-produk-2/

Indonesian Institute of Sciences (Lembaga Ilmu Pengetahuan Indonesia - LIPI). (2016).

Branding Guideline for Products from Indonesia bIosphere Reserves. Jakarta.

Indonesian MAB Programme National Committee. (2017). Indonesia Country Report

2016-2017. Jakarta.

Indonesian MoEF (Ministry of Environment and Forestry Republic of Indonesia).

(n.d.). Pedoman Buku Swadeklarasi. Pusat Standarisasi Lingkungan dan
Kehutanan. Retrieved November 8, 2018, from http://standardisasi.menlhk.go.id/
index.php/download/pedoman_buku-swadeklarasi/

Isolda, G. M. (n.d.). Canada’s Environmental Choice Program and its Impact on

Developing-Country Trade. In Eco-labelling and International Trade. Palgrave
Macmillan.

Karlsson, L., & Dolnicar, S. (2015). Does Eco Certification Sell Tourism Services?
Evidence from a Quasi-Experimental Observation Study in Iceland. Journal of
Sustainable Tourism 24.

Knaus, F., K., B. L., & and Siegrist, D. (2017). The Economic Impact of Labeled Regional
Products: The Experience of the UNESCO Biosphere Reserve Entlebuch. Mountain
Research and Development 37(1), 121-130.

Knickel, K., & Renting, H. (2002). Methodological and Conceptual Issues in the Study of
Multifunctionality and Rural Development. Sociologia Ruralis 40(4), 512-528.

Kraus, F., Cornelia, M., & Job, H. (2014). Biosphere Reserves and Their Contribution
to Sustainable Development: A Value-Chain Analysis in the Rhön Biosphere
Reserve, Germany. Zeitschrift für Wirtschaftsgeographie, 58, 164-180.

La Palma Journal. (2016). Cheese from La Palma with DOP Seal of Quality. Retrieved
December 6, 2017, from http://www.la-palma24.info/en/cheese-from-la-palma/

Lapalmabiosfera. (2014a). The Brand “La Palma Biosphere Worldwide Reserve”.

Retrieved February 6, 2018, from http://www.lapalmabiosfera.es/en/productos

Lapalmabiosfera. (2014b). Tourism in La Palma. Retrieved February 7, 2018,

from http://www.lapalmabiosfera.es/en/turismo

MAB Task Force on the Development of Quality Economies in Biosphere Reserves.

(2002). Lanzarote.

48
Miyazaki, A. (n.d.). Guide to Aya Town’s Agriculture that Respects Natural Ecosystems
and Organic Farm Products. Retrieved October 31, 2017, from http://www.town.
aya.miyazaki.jp/ayatown/agriculture/images/EN_agriculture.pdf

Muller, E. (2002). Environmental Labelling, Innovation and the Toolbox of Environmental

Policy: Lessons Learned from the German Blue Angel Program.

Naumann, E. (2001). Eco-labelling: Overview and Implications for Developing Countries.

Development Policy Research Unit University of Cape Town.

OECD. (2005). Effects of Eco-labelling Schemes: Compilation of Recent Studies.

OECD. (2008). Promoting Sustainable Consumption: Good Practices in OECD Countries.

Paris: OECD.

Orloczki, M. (2012). Eco-labelling for Environmental Friendly Hotel Industry. International

Dimensions in Economic, Poland, 122-129.

Piper, L. A., & Yeo, M. (2012). Ecolabels, Ecocertification and Ecotourism. Sustainable
Tourism: Socio-Cultural, Environmental and Economics Impacts, 279-294.

Pokorny, D. (2011). Introduction to the Rhön Biosphere Reserve: Strategies

for Sustainable Regional Development in a Rural Area. Retrieved September
27, 2017, from https://www.bfn.de/fileadmin/MDB/documents/themen/
internationalernaturschutz/2011-AfriBR-14-Pokorny_Rhoen.pdf

Pontillas, M. S., Leon, E. M., & Fuentes, R. T. (2016). Best Practices and Management
Experiences in Ecotourism: Generating Alternative Livelihoods within the Palawan
Biosphere Reserve, Philippines - Technical Report. Jakarta: UNESCO.

Poop, D. (2009). Effizienzsteigerung des Prüfzeichens für das Biosphärenreservat

Schorfheide-Chorin. FUTOUR Regionalberatung, Haundorf. Retrieved
from https://www.bfn.de/fileadmin/MDB/documents/themen/
internationalernaturschutz/2011-AfriBR-14-Pokorny_Rhoen.pdf

Rosenberg, L., & Kokovkin, T. (2016, march). West-Estonian Archipelago Biosphere

Reserve and Lima Action Plan. Slides presented at 4th World Congress of
Biosphere Reserves. Lima, Peru.

Ruoss. (2002, October). The Entlebuch Biosphere Reserve for Sustainable Regional
Development. Report of the workshop of the Focus Group of the Task Force on
the Development of Quality Economies in Biosphere Reserves. Berlin, Germany.

Ryglova, K. (2007). Eco-Certification as a Tool of Sustainable Tourism. Agriculture

Journals, 53(3), 138-143.

Salzman, J. (1991). Environmental Labelling in OECD Countries.

Sasidharan, V., Sirakaya, E., & Kerstetter, D. (2001). Developing Countries and Tourism
Ecolabels. Tourism Management 23, 161-174. Retrieved February 9, 2018, from
http://www.videa.ca/wp-content/uploads/2015/08/Developing-countries-and-
ecotourism-labels.pdf

49
 SBA (Sustainable Business Associates). (2006). Environmental Labelling: an Overview.

Simatupang, W., Suhandi, A. S., & Sungkar, R. (2014). Panduan Pengembangan Produk
Perjalanan Ekowisata. Jakarta: Indecon.

Tanaka, T. (2018). Standard Framework for Biosphere Reserve Management Informed

by Sustainability Science (First Draft Report February 28,2018 ed.).

UBE (UNESCO Biosphere Entlebuch). (2007). The UNESCO Biosphere Entlebuch

Switzerland: Advancing Towards a Model of Sustainable Living and Working.

UNESCO. (2011). Cat Ba Biosphere Reserve Announces Line of Official Products and
Services. Retrieved September 14, 2017, from http://www.unesco.org/new/en/
hanoi/about-the-ha-noi-office/single-view/news/cat_ba_biosphere_reserve_
announces_line_of_official_products/

UNESCO. (2012). West Estonian Archipelato. Ecological Sciences for Sustainable

Development. Retrieved February 6, 2018, from http://www.unesco.org/new/en/
natural-sciences/environment/ecological-sciences/biosphere-reserves/europe-
north-america/estonia/west-estonian-archipelago/

UNESCO. (2018). Development of the Biosphere Reserve Brand Identity at the Local
Level. Paris: UNESCO.

UNESCO and National Natural Landscape. (2007). Model Regions of World Standing:
UNESCO Biosphere Reserves. Berlin: Europarc Deutschland e.V.

UNESCO MAB. (2015). MAB Strategy 2015-2025. Retrieved September 27,

2017, from http://www.unesco.org/fileadmin/MULTIMEDIA/HQ/SC/pdf/MAB_
Strategy_2015-2025_final_text.pdf

UNESCO MAB. (2017a). A New Roadmap for the Man and the Biosphere (MAB)
Programme and its World Network of Biosphere Reserves. Paris:
UNESCO. Retrieved January 9, 2018, from http://unesdoc.unesco.org/
images/0024/002474/247418E.pdf

UNESCO MAB. (2017b). Biosphere Reserves - Learning Sites for Sustainable

Development. Ecological Sciences for Sustainable Development. Retrieved January
16, 2018, from http://www.unesco.org/new/en/natural-sciences/environment/
ecological-sciences/biosphere-reserves/

UNESCO MAB. (2017c). Asia and the Pacific: 147 Biosphere Reserves in 24 Countries.
Ecological Sciences for Sustainable Development. Retrieved March 9, 2018,
from http://www.unesco.org/new/en/natural-sciences/environment/ecological-
sciences/biosphere-reserves/asia-and-the-pacific/

UNESCO Office Jakarta. (2010). Lessons from Biosphere Reserves in the Asia-Pacific
Region, and a Way Forward: A Regional Review of Biosphere Reserves in Asia and
the Pacific to Achieve Sustainable Development. Retrieved March 13, 2018, from

50
 http://unesdoc.unesco.org/images/0018/001883/188345e.pdf

UNESCO Office Jakarta. (2015). Meeting Report: The 8th Southeast Asia Biosphere
Reserves Network Meeting, The 2nd Asia-Pacific Biosphere Reserves Networks
Strategic Meeting, Asia-Pacific Workshop on Strengthening Capacity for
Management of Biosphere Reserves and Protected Areas. Retrieved March 13,
2018, from http://unesdoc.unesco.org/images/0023/002336/233602E.pdf

UNWTO. (2016). Asia Tourism Trends 2016 Edition. Retrieved March 14, 2018, from
https://www.e-unwto.org/doi/pdf/10.18111/9789284418312

USDA (United States Department of Agriculture). (2016). Labeling Organic Products.

Retrieved February 27, 2018, from https://www.ams.usda.gov/sites/default/
files/media/Labeling%20Organic%20Products.pdf

Withyman, C. J. (2015). Sustainable Tourism Certification: a Case Study of Noosa

Biosphere Reserve.

Worku, M., & Gebey, T. (2016). Developing a Band and Marketing Concept for Regional
Natural Products Produced in Lake Tana Biosphere Reserve, Ethiopia. Final
Report submitted to NABU. Retrieved January 15, 2018, from http://www.
laketana-biosphere.com/wp-content/uploads/2014/10/Brand-Development_
Strategy.pdf

WTTC (World Travel and Tourism Council). (2017). Travel and Tourism Global Economic
Impact and Issues.

Zhang, H. Q., Chong, K., & Ap, J. (1999). An Analysis of Tourism Policy Development in
Modern china. Tourism Management 20, 471-485. RetrievedFebruary13, 2018,
from http://citeseerx.ist.psu.edu/viewdoc download?doi=10.1.1.603.1974&rep
=rep1&type=pdf

51
For more information,
please contact:

UNESCO Office Jakarta

Jl. Galuh (II) No. 5,
Jakarta 12110, Indonesia
Tél: +62-21 739 9818
www.unesco.org/jakarta