Bart Van Vooren内部能源和环境 //www.ludikid.com/author/bvanvooren/ 能源、商品和环境法律和政策开发 Tue2023年1月24日14:48:44+00 en-US 时钟 一号 https://wordpress.org/?v=6.1.1&lxb_maple_bar_source=lxb_maple_bar_source https://insideenvironmentredesign.covingtonburlingblogs.com/wp-content/uploads/sites/47/2021/06/cropped-cropped-cropped-favicon-3-32x32.png Bart Van Vooren内部能源和环境 //www.ludikid.com/author/bvanvooren/ 32码 32码 即将到来的欧盟绿色索赔规则 //www.ludikid.com/2023/01/upcoming-eu-rules-on-green-claims/ Rosa Oyarzabal、Lucas Falco、Candido García Molyneux、Yuliya Gevrenova和Bart Van Vooren Tue2023年1月24日02:29:26+00 ESG系统 欧洲能源和气候政策 广告保护 绿清洗 净零 可持续性 //www.ludikid.com/?p=8415 p对齐='Center'###/p>欧盟委员会预期在未来数月内提交绿申请指令建议(“绿申请指令建议”)或'建议'。连同建议指令授权消费者通过更好的保护避免不公平做法和更好的信息实现绿色过渡Continue Reading…

The European Commission is expected to present a Proposal for a Directive on Green Claims  ("Proposed Green Claims Directive" or "the Proposal") within the next few months.  Together with the Proposal for a Directive empowering consumers for the green transition through better protection against unfair practices and better information ("Consumer Empowerment Directive Proposal"), the Proposed Green Claims Directive would contribute to the EU's green transition towards a circular, climate-neutral and clean economy by creating a common methodology for the substantiation of green claims that concern the environmental footprint of products, services and companies.It would aim to reduce greenwashing and enable consumers to take informed purchasing decisions based on reliable information about the sustainability of products and traders.

If adopted, it is likely to significantly limit the environmental claims that businesses can make in the EU/EEA.  Businesses may want to consider approaching the Commission to try to influence the final legislative proposal that it is expected to present by March 2023.  Once the Commission presents its legislative proposal, businesses should consider proposing amendments to the European Parliament and Council. 

Harmonization of the Rules on Green Claims in the EU

Currently EU law does not explicitly regulate environmental claims.万博体育app手机登录Instead, environmental claims are subject to the general rules of Directive 2005/29 on Unfair Business-to-Consumer Practices and Directive 2006/114 on Comparative Advertising.  While the Commission and Member States have issued guidance interpreting these directives and their national implementation in the context of green claims, in practice there is a wide range of variations on the requirements for and enforcement against these claims among Member States.  The Proposed Green Claims Directive is expected to create a harmonized set of rules on the substantiation of voluntary green claims applicable to all companies operating in the EU/EEA.

Covered Green Claims

The Proposal is expected to define green claims subject to the new rules as "any message or representation, including text, pictorial, graphic or symbolic representation (e.g., labels, brand names, company names or product names), which states or implies that a product or trader has a positive or no impact on the environment or is less damaging to the environment than other products or traders, respectively, or has improved their impact over time."  The Proposal is not expected to apply to claims that cover aspects other than those related to the environment.  For example, sustainability claims would only be covered if they refer to environmental sustainability (e.g., preventingbiodiversity loss).

The proposed rules are also only expected to cover voluntary claims made by companies in the context of business-to-consumer ("B2C") transactions.  The rules would also not cover environmental mandatory labelling or disclosures under EU environmental rules.万博体育app手机登录For example, mandatory declarations under Proposal for Ecodesign for Sustainable Products Regulation, or the requirements under the EU Taxonomy Regulation or the Proposal for a Regulation Establishing a Union Regulatory Framework on the Certification of Carbon Removals) are out of scope.

General Rules on Green Claims

The Proposal is expected to impose general requirements on the environmental claims that companies can make that will mirror those of the existing Commission's guidance.  In particular, it will require that companies:

  • only make environmental claims that have been substantiated through an approved methodology that meets specific criteria (see below); 
  • do not make a positive environmental claims where a product has both a positive and negative environmental impact.  Companies may communicate the positive claim only if they also communicate the negative impact in a clear and understandable way.  For example, if savings in water consumption lead to a notable increase in greenhouse gas emissions or to a negative environmental impact in another stage of the life-cycle of the product (e.g., CO2 savings at the stage of manufacturing leading to a notable increase of CO2 emissions at the use phase), both facts should be disclosed together with the claim;
  • make available the information on the assessment on which the environmental claim is based, including (i) information on the product or activities of the trader subject to the claim, (ii) environmental aspects, environmental impacts or environmental performance covered by the claim, (iii) the methodology used, (iv) the underlying studies or calculations used to assess, measure and monitor the environmental impacts or aspects covered by the claim, (v) a brief explanation how improvements in environmental performance are achieved, etc.  Access to this information may be provided in the form of a weblink, QR code or equivalent!万博体育app手机登录and
  • review the accuracy of their environmental claims (and their substantiation) at least once every five years from the date of the underlying studies or calculations.  In cases where there are circumstances that may affect the accuracy of the claim (i.e., when there are updates of the scientific methodology substantiating the claim), the environmental claim should be reviewed and updated immediately.

Methodology to Substantiate Green Claims

In line with current Commission's and Member States' guidance on environmental claims, the Proposal is expected to require economic operators to duly substantiate their environmental claims on the basis of a methodology that:

  • is based on widely recognized scientific evidence, state of the art technical knowledge and takes into account relevant international standards.  Where there is no recognized scientific method or insufficient evidence to assess environmental impacts and aspects, claims referring to such environmental impacts would not be allowed;
  • assesses the environmental impact throughout the whole life-cycle of the product;
  • takes into account: the product composition!素材制作从过程和产品使用中排出耐用性、可恢复性和生命终结性;
  • asesse万博体育app手机登录and
  • is regularly reviewed by a third party with a view to take account of technical and scientific progress and the development of relevant international standards as well as revised where necessary to reflect such progress.

The Proposal is expected to add a lengthy list of additional requirements with which the methodologies to substantiate environmental claims must comply.  This is a significant departure from the previous, lighter requirements under the Commission's and Member States' green claims guidance.  In this context, the Proposal links these requirements to the existing EU Product and Organization Environmental Footprint methods ("PEF" and "OEF").  Where a company complies with the Product Environmental Footprint Category Rules ("PEFCRs") for a product, the claims made on the basis of the PEFCRs are deemed compliant with the requirements of the Proposal.

Requirements Related to Comparative Environmental Claims

The Proposal is also expected to include rules on environmental comparative claims, namely, that:

  • companies use the same methodology to assess the environmental impacts, aspect or performance of products or traders to which the comparison is made (e.g., where two traders make a claim on climate change, where one considered only direct impacts, whilst the other considered both their direct and indirect impacts, the results are not comparable);
  • data used for the substantiation of the comparative claim must be generated or sourced in an equivalent manner to ensure their comparability (e.g., choosing indicators on the same aspects but that use a different formula for quantification makes comparisons impossible, and therefore, there is a risk of misleading consumers)!and
  • the most significant stages along the value chain must be taken into account for all products and traders compared, etc.

If adopted, these requirements are likely to make environmental comparative advertising more challenging for companies.  Product certification and testing is costly, and the proposed wording would in practice require companies to conduct head-to-head studies to be able to claim any comparative advantage.  Broad, sector-wide claims based on publicly available studies would no longer be acceptable.

New Rules on Forward Looking Claims

The Proposal is also expected to introduce new strict rules on forward-looking claims (i.e., claims that suggest that a product, service or company will achieve specific environmental benefits by a certain future date).The Proposal is expected to require that claims related to the future environmental performance of a product, service or trader:

  • be accompanied by commitments that include milestones to be achieved within clearly specified time frames (if a target set for 2030 does not include any periodic milestones, it is impossible for stakeholders, or the trader itself, to monitor whether they are on track and what are the challenges);
  • indicate a baseline year for targets and the indicators reflecting performance in the baseline year and the year linked to the improvement set out in the claim (e.g., "50% reduction of greenhouse gas emissions compared to 2015" instead of "50% reduction of greenhouse gas emissions");
  • not include actions or targets already achieved, etc.

Enforcement and Access to Justice for third Parties

The proposal is expected to introduce new and reinforced rules on enforcement against companies making non-compliant environmental claims.  Member States are expected to be required to carry out a compliance monitoring:

  • as part of their regular checks;
  • in cases where they have sufficient reason to believe that an environmental claim presents a risk of infringement of the rules, laid down in the Proposal!或
  • 响应.

CompanyAfter receiving a notification for non-compliance, companies would only have 10 business days to provide an answer.  Where a trader does not provide a timely or satisfactory answer, enforcement authorities must require the trader to correct the non-compliant claim or immediately stop its communication.  The trader will have to implement the corrective actions within 30 business days.

The Proposal is also expected to allow third parties to submit complaints against non-compliant green claims before administrative authorities, and thereafter courts, if the third parties have sufficient interest or have the rights infringed.   Such complains may lead to injunctive actions, including the immediate stop of the communication of the non-compliant claims.

Next Steps

The European Commission is expected to formally present its proposed Green Claims Directive by the end of March 2023.  Once presented, the European Parliament and Council will consider the Proposal for adoption through the ordinary legislative procedure.  This process will allow for the introduction of amendments and will take at least 18 months.  As indicated above, industry should keep a close eye on the development of this proposal as the requirements it will impose will have a significant impact on the current practices.

ESG强制报表形状:CSRD传递EFRAG通过ESRS草案 //www.ludikid.com/2022/12/eu-mandatory-esg-reporting-takes-shape-csrd-is-passed-and-efrag-adopts-draft-esrs/ Paul Mertenskötter、Sarah Bishop、Candido García Molyneux、Bart Van Vooren和Ivy-VictoriaOtradovec wed2022年12月7日 ESG系统 欧洲能源和气候政策 CSRD 欧洲可持续性报告标准 欧洲联盟 ISSB 报表编程 供应链链 //www.ludikid.com/?p=8340 p对齐表示'中心''###p>United United Nations(“EU”)传递世界最深远强制环境、社会和管理报告机制公司可持续性报告指令从2024年将适用于第一批大欧盟公司,并在随后的四年中逐步扩展至小公司归根结底Continue Reading… p对齐表示s/data.europa.eu/doc/doc/PE/P-352022-INIT/en/pdf最终预期它适用于5万多公司在欧盟注册、上市或经商值得注意的是,从2028年起CSRD将适用于非EU母公司,这些公司生成欧盟净营业量150万欧元以上,并至少有一个欧盟子公司受CSRD约束(或一定规模的局部分支)。spanid表示'More-8340'##span>

为此,欧洲委员会(“委”)预计将通过详细强制性ESG披露要求,如Europes可持续性报告标准此外,CSRD报告将受经认证审计师有限保证的约束,预计最终将受更严格的保证标准约束(i.e. ,“合理”保证)。意图既向投资者提供投资决策所需要信息以考虑可持续性因素,又更广泛地增加公司ESG对其他利益攸关方影响的透明度( /em>、管理者、消费者、民间社会和非政府组织)。

squative上文指出,从2024年开始,从2024年开始分批实施这些法律,第一批报告应于2025年提交CSRD将通过ESRS实现操作,ECRS委员会必须在2023年6月前以委托行为方式通过ESRS实现操作一套拟议的ESRS草案由欧洲财务报告咨询组(EFRAG)在过去一年中开发并上星期提交委员会审议。

ESRS目前建议覆盖84个离散披露要求和1 144个定量和定性数据点。

通用标准处理关键基础概念以及报告过程和格式符合CSRD可持续性报告ESRS1定义二重重要性概念,CSRD报告关键原理之一双重相对性标准意味着公司必须报告不仅对企业ESG问题的潜在金融影响,而且对其企业对人和地球的物质影响。换句话说,公司必须报告从金融角度讲无关紧要的问题。ESRS1还澄清说,某些披露-例如温室气体排放-一直是材料。

十大主题ESRS覆盖所有ESG三大支柱如下(见>高度:自动机">FY 2025 / 2026ESRSListed Small- and Medium Enterprise ("SME")Is not a Large Company but has transferable securities listed on a regulated market" in the EU and meets at least 2 of the following 3 conditions: (i) more than 10 employees (annual average), (ii) EUR 700k in net turnover, and (iii) EUR 350k in total assets.FY 2026
(can opt to delay until FY 2028) / 2027 (2029 if delay)ESRSNon-EU Parent Company With Significant Business in the EUCompany that is not established under the laws of a EU Member State (e.g., the US) and that has generated more than EUR 150M of net turnover in the EU for each of the last two consecutive financial years and has at least: (i) one subsidiary that meets any of the definitions above (e.g., Large Company), or (ii) a branch (generally an unincorporated physical presence) that generated net turnover greater than EUR 40M in the preceding year.FY 2028 / 2029Choice of:
(i) ESRS!具体可持续性报告标准欧盟将为非欧盟母公司开发或三)欧盟认为等效的本地司法可持续性报告标准。
荷兰最高法院判定荷兰有人权义务处理气候变化:Urvenda案例 //www.ludikid.com/2020/01/the-dutch-supreme-court-holds-that-the-netherlands-has-a-human-rights-obligation-to-mitigate-climate-change-the-urgenda-case/ CandidoGarcía Molyneux和Bart Van Vooren 弗里2020年1月17日15:14:29+00 非分类化 气候变化 欧洲 //www.ludikid.com/?p=7156 2019年12月20日,荷兰最高法院确认区法院和上诉法院的判决,要求荷兰政府到2020年实现温室气体减排25%比1990年减少20%,而不是政府自2011年以来设想的20%下降20%案例Continue Reading… serviceandense.com/2015/10/can-courts-oblige-states-to-The case was brought by the Urgenda Foundation — a Dutch NGO — and has resulted in a landmark decision that may influence climate change litigation in other countries across Europe, such as the lawsuit filed by NGOs in Germany on January 15, 2020.

Three Striking Conclusions for International Climate Change Law

The Dutch Supreme Court's decision contains three striking messages:

  1. The decision considers that the European Convention on Human Rights ("ECHR") imposes a positive obligation on countries to take measures to mitigate climate change.基于对ECHR第二条(生命权)和第八条(私生活权)的广义解释,法院认为,气候变化对荷兰公民构成如此“真实即时”风险,ECHR要求荷兰政府减缓气候变化。
  2. 决定还认为,各国有义务采取措施减缓气候变化,即使它们在温室气体排放中所占比重最小。法院从《气候公约》及其协议和国际法原则中得出结论,每个国家都有个人责任解决全球问题,并可在法院接受问责。与>Paris协议 一致,该协议确认气候变化是一项全球责任,需要“各级政府和各种角色的参与”。
  3. 表示鉴于荷兰最高法院,不仅国家单独负责应对气候变化,法院还可以判定每个州减缓气候变化的公平比例。
  1. 这不仅取决于在国家法院直接应用ECHR的可能性,还取决于这些法院在多大程度上愿意遵循最高法院对ECHR第2和第8条的广义解释。
  2. 荷兰法院承认欧洲法院从未就气候变化问题作出决定,但并不认为有必要请求法院提出意见。欧洲人权法院确立了辅助原则并允许国家法院在应用公约时有一定自由裁量权,而欧洲法院根据气候变化对欧洲人权法院的解释可能在诉讼和政策行动方面对全欧产生重大影响。
  3. Last但非最不重要,法院可在何种程度上扩展每个国家对公司减少排放负有个人责任的结论举例说,公司是否根据《欧洲人权公约》第2条有义务缓解气候变化?
Baidu
map