From requirement to experimentation
It was during the Grenelle de l’environnement [1] that the idea emerged on informing consumers on the environmental impact of products they were buying. This proposal was translated into legal terms in the Article 59 of the Law of August 3rd 2009, called “Grenelle 1” [2]. According to the text, consumers must be able to access “sincere, objective and comprehensive environmental information on overall characteristics of the product/packaging couple.”
The early versions of the law called “Grenelle 2” provided for the gradual implementation of this provision from January 1st 2011. But, given technical difficulties and the huge costs of implementation, MPs strongly reduced the scope of the law. Thus, the text finally enacted on July 12th, 2010 [3], only provided for the implementation of a one year experimental period as of July 1st 2011. At the end of this period, a report would be forwarded to the Parliament to assess whether or not to generalize the experiment.
A difficult implementation
Given the lack of enthusiasm from the current parliamentary majority, concerning environmental issues, it is quite unlikely that the idea of a compulsory labelling extended to all products will emerge shortly.
Actually, even environmental organizations seem to have better things to focus on! Considering the implementation of this environmental information requirement very complex in comparison to the immediate benefits, they have let, during debates on the law “Grenelle 2”, the former requirement turn into an experiment. Eventually, issues concerning energy savings in construction and transport and agricultural policies have seemed more important to tackle. However, they would have preferred a deadline to be set for the experimentation phase, and the environmental information to become compulsory by 2014.
As for cosmetics, the FEBEA, the French trade association representing the manufacturers cosmetic products, is in charge of the secretarial work for the Working Group in charge of studying the implementation of the environmental information in this sector. Until then considered very proactive, the professional organization appears now much more cautious.
Methodological differences
According to several participants of the Working Group, the publication, in the short-term, of a guide on environmental labelling of shampoos, which was to be the cosmetic industry’s contribution to this national experiment was delayed. The main reason to this: significant methodological difference of opinion between stakeholders. The overall approach initially adopted by the Working Group was actually called into question, some participants wishing to step up the process by only focusing on greenhouse gas emissions, in the wake of what was undertaken in the United Kingdom.
The general feeling being that the deadline set for the beginning of the experiment (July 1st, 2011) was anyway very optimistic given the scope of the task.
However, many manufacturers are eager to see the file make some progress. If only because they have already worked hard to gather the necessary information concerning the implementation of the labelling. According to Philippe de Brugière, Vice President, in charge of the Packaging development of L’Occitane, and who did not participate to the work of the Working Group, but who nonetheless followed them closely, “a lot of work has already been achieved, but resources to mobilize are important and obviously industry players have everything to gain in pooling their efforts.”
As far as L’Occitane is concerned a global approach was preferred. Beyond the mere measurement of greenhouse gas emissions, the French cosmetics maker and retailer seeks to evaluate the entire impact of its products on non-renewable resources, air and water pollution, etc. “We hired a person that has been exclusively working on this issue for one year,” says Philippe de Brugière. “We have made important progress, while some data about certain ingredients are still missing.”
