As global awareness of environmental issues grows, businesses are increasingly confronted with the dual challenge of achieving their sustainability goals while ensuring compliance with an ever-evolving regulatory landscape.
One sector in which this is felt acutely is personal protective equipment (PPE) so how do you reduce environmental impact and maintain product efficacy?
Regulatory compliance, sustainability, and stakeholder demands
In many industries, sustainability and regulatory compliance are often viewed as two sides of the same coin. While regulatory compliance serves as a foundational requirement for businesses, sustainability is increasingly becoming a competitive differentiator.
Guido Van Duren, Ansell’s Director of Global Regulatory Compliance believes that customer demands add pressure to ensure companies drive their sustainability strategy further.
In his view, regulations are difficult to enforce, and therefore not effective without the additional pressure from market and customers.
Sustainability is increasingly becoming a competitive differentiator
It’s a perspective Indiana de Seze, Associate Director of Regulatory Affairs at Ansell shares, as she describes two main drivers: “One is governance and legislative – a few regulations are already in the pipeline or have been adopted – and we’re particularly looking at what’s happening in the EU. The other is market demand. The convergence between these two drivers means a better knowledge of what goes into our products.”
Nalise Hahn, an independent sustainability consultant, works with a number of businesses to understand, coordinate and enhance their sustainability strategies, believes there are further positive motivations for organisations to accelerate progress.
“I think many forward-thinking businesses are seeking to take action, because they've recognised there are so many competitive advantages to doing that,” she says. “For some businesses that means responding to customer demand. For others it means recognising efficiencies and for some it’s all about brand – really strengthening or adapting that to meet market or investor demand.”
So it’s clear there are many reasons to accelerate sustainability strategy, but what does this action look like in practice? And how can businesses share their progress without falling into the greenwashing trap?
Taking action beyond carbon emissions
While actions to reduce carbon emissions are a significant aim of environmental regulations, they represent just one facet of a broader regulatory framework.
Compliance encompasses various issues, including the use of hazardous chemicals in products, extended producer responsibility, and accuracy of green claims.
All experts agree that greenwashing is a big problem in the industry – and the wider business landscape – welcoming the Green Claims Directive that will make businesses liable for greenwashing and misleading sustainability claims.
A focus on sustainability for some businesses is about customer demand, for others it means recognising efficiencies, and for some it’s all about brand
The rise in false or misleading environmental claims has prompted regulatory bodies to act decisively. In France, for instance, specific terms like ‘biodegradable’ and ‘environmentally friendly’ are discouraged as they’re considered vague and confusing.
For businesses, this creates clearer guidelines, but brings its own set of challenges – especially for those operating across international markets.
Van Duren believes transparency and accountability are the real benefits of creating a unified greenwashing regulation, matching the stringent, evidence-based model France has adopted. “It adds credibility to the company, and it also allows companies to feel very comfortable with disclosing their positioning transparently, based on an understanding that this is not about punishing companies,” he explains.
How can businesses share their progress without falling into the greenwashing trap?
Additionally, emerging regulations such as the European Deforestation Regulation (EUDR) impose stringent traceability requirements on certain commodities, compelling businesses to ensure that their supply chains adhere to ESG best practice.
De Seze explains what that means in the real world: “[The EUDR] is a text that requires that, for commodities that are within the scope, we know exactly when and where this was produced, and whether any deforestation, or forest degradation activities, have taken place to produce that commodity. We need to have full traceability and make sure that our suppliers – or their suppliers – have met all the requirements of local legislation.
“It obliges EU operators to look at what's happening outside the boundaries of the EU, make sure that everything is in conformity – not only with environmental requirements, but also human rights, labour rights, the rights over the land and indigenous population rights,” de Seze adds.
In France specific terms like ‘biodegradable’ and ‘environmentally friendly’ are discouraged
Following an update from the European Commission, the EUDR implementation will likely be postponed by 12 months. That being said, the official date currently remains December 2024 until official changes are confirmed.
Hahn also makes the case for a more inquisitive view of the supply chain, encouraging businesses to look at the social impact of land use change.
“We need to start thinking about this from a social perspective – there are indigenous people in local communities who live in these areas, who rely on these pieces of land and rely on these ecosystems,” she suggests.
The role of environmental labels and trusted accreditations
In an increasingly crowded marketplace, eco labels and certifications can provide businesses with a competitive edge. But to what extent can consumers rely on them?
Hahn identifies there are certain trusted certifications to give consumers peace of mind. “Really having that direct relationship with suppliers and engaging with them directly plays a big part,” she says. “But then you can also, of course, use certifications that have been around for a very long time. For example, FSC or Forest Stewardship Council. And what these are really doing is helping you to verify that the products you're purchasing are coming from a sustainable source.”
Van Duren believes transparency and accountability are the real benefits of creating a unified greenwashing regulation
But it’s clear there is no single source of truth here. Again, it’s the lack of uniformity across industries and markets that stands out to de Seze. “There is not a single, certification or label that we should be looking at that would be applicable across industries, or across the world, or even across EU member states at the moment. There are some indicators like Ecolabel and these kinds of things. But it's partial information and I’m not sure the consumer really understands.”
Perhaps third-party testing could help level the playing field and ensure businesses are meeting the same rigorous standards? The experts suggest it may not be so simple.
Making yourself the differentiator
For Indiana de Seze, Ansell’s success comes down to its core mission – to protect people: “We are in the safety business, so our incentive is always to look out for what can preserve the safety of our products or improve the safety of products, or the safety that it brings to the users. It’s certainly a market positioning that obliges us to follow and anticipate the trends.”
In the wider market, what impact could a more harmonised approach to eco labels have? Hahn is clear that helping businesses and consumers make informed choices is hugely important. “Creating eco label schemes and product passports is going to make it much easier for consumers, whether that's B2B or B2C, to verify claims,” she says. “But also, we all want to make informed choices at the end of the day. So that's really where I see a lot of the change happening and where I see the importance of PPE fitting into sustainability practices.”
