Skip to main content
SpringerLink
Log in
Book cover

New Developments in Eco-Innovation Research pp 95–122Cite as

Outlook: Can Environmental Product Standards Enable Eco-Innovation?

  • Chapter
  • First Online:

  • 804 Accesses

Part of the book series: Sustainability and Innovation ((SUSTAINABILITY))

Abstract

Environmental product standards (EPS) certifying environmental product attributes are key for fostering sustainable consumption, which is an essential measure for achieving the Sustainable Development Goals (SDGs) adopted by the United Nations. EPS, also called environmental labels or eco-labels, are intended to describe environmental features of consumer goods and raise consumers’ awareness about sustainability. By fostering sustainable consumption they can become one of the main policy instruments for tackling climate change. They can be mandatory, where the provision of information is compulsory, or voluntary. In both cases EPS aim at correcting the information asymmetry between consumers and providers. Evidence shows that demand-pull is a decisive factor for firms’ to voluntarily provide environmental quality. Thus, by enhancing consumers’ awareness, it can spur eco-innovation. Nevertheless, EPS have also raised some concerns about barriers to trade and “greenwashing”. Furthermore, the recent multiplication of EPS has fostered a label competition, confusing prospective consumers, and thus endangering potential sustainability benefits resulting from EPS. The aim of this chapter is to provide policymakers with an overview on how EPS can support eco-innovation. For this purpose we first describe the different types of labels and review evidence on the different impacts of EPS. Later on, we analyze drivers, benefits and barriers of adoption of EPS and their relation to eco-innovation and environmental performance. Finally, we provide an overview on new behavioral insights to EPS.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution.

Chapter
USD   29.95
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Available as PDF
  • Read on any device
  • Instant download
  • Own it forever
eBook
USD   84.99
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Available as EPUB and PDF
  • Read on any device
  • Instant download
  • Own it forever
Softcover Book
USD   109.99
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Compact, lightweight edition
  • Dispatched in 3 to 5 business days
  • Free shipping worldwide - see info
Hardcover Book
USD   109.99
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Durable hardcover edition
  • Dispatched in 3 to 5 business days
  • Free shipping worldwide - see info

Tax calculation will be finalised at checkout

Purchases are for personal use only

Learn about institutional subscriptions

Notes

  1. 1.

    Environmental product standards can be also referred to as Environmental Labeling and Information Schemes (ELIS) (Gruère 2013; Klintman 2016; Prag et al. 2016).

  2. 2.

    Mexico, Guatemala, Nicaragua, Costa Rica, Colombia, Peru, Côte d’lvoire, Ghana, Tanzania, Vietnam, Indonesia, Papua New Guinea.

  3. 3.

    Red tape is the term used to define the bureaucratic process that companies need to fulfil including documentation of the compliance with the criteria to adopt the label.

References

  • Abrahamse, W., Steg, L., Vlek, C., & Rothengatter, T. (2007). The effect of tailored information, goal setting, and tailored feedback on household energy use, energy-related behaviors, and behavioral antecedents. Journal of Environmental Psychology, 27(4), 265–276.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Allcott, H. (2011). Social norms and energy conservation. Journal of Public Economics, 95(9–10), 1082–1095.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Allcott, H. (2013). The welfare effects of misperceived product costs: Data and calibrations from the automobile market. American Economic Journal: Economic Policy, 5(3), 30–66.

    Google Scholar 

  • Allcott, H., Knittel, C., & Taubinsky, D. (2015). Tagging and targeting of energy efficiency subsidies. American Economic Review, 105(5), 187–191.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Allcott, H., & Rogers, T. (2014). The short-run and long-run effects of behavioral interventions: Experimental evidence from energy conservation. American Economic Review, 104(10), 3003–3037.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Allcott, H., & Sweeney, R. (2014). The role of sales agents in information disclosure: Evidence from a field experiment. Management Science, 63(1), 21–39.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Allcott, H., & Wozny, N. (2014). Gasoline prices, fuel economy, and the energy paradox. Review of Economics and Statistics, 96(5), 779–795.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Anderson, S. T., & Newell, R. G. (2004). Information programs for technology adoption: The case of energy-efficiency audits. Resource and Energy Economics, 26(1), 27–50.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Arditi, S, Meli, L., & Toulouse, E. (2013). Revising EU energy label: Evolution or revolution?. ECEEE summer study proceedings. ECEEE 2013 summer study – Rethink, Review, Restart.

    Google Scholar 

  • Asensio, O. I., & Delmas, M. A. (2017). The effectiveness of U.S. energy efficiency building labels. Nature Energy, 2(4), 17033.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Ayres, I., Raseman, S., & Shih, A. (2013). Evidence from two large field experiments that peer comparison feedback can reduce residential energy usage. Journal of Law, Economics, and Organization, 29(5), 992–1022.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Bird, L., & Sumner, J. (2010). Green power marketing in the United States: A status report (Technical Report NREL/TP-6A20-4903). Washington, DC: National Renewable Energy Laboratory.

    Google Scholar 

  • Bjørner, T. B., Hansen, L. G., & Russell, C. S. (2004). Environmental labeling and consumers’ choice—an empirical analysis of the effect of the Nordic Swan. Journal of Environmental Economics and Management, 47(3), 411–434.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Blackman, A., & Naranjo, M. A. (2012). Does eco-certification have environmental benefits? Organic coffee in Costa Rica. Ecological Economics, 83, 58–66.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Bloom, N., Eifert, B., Mahajan, A., McKenzie, D., & Roberts, J. (2013). Does management matter? Evidence from India. Quarterly Journal of Economics, 128(1), 1–51.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Borchers, A. M., Duke, J. M., & Parsons, G. R. (2007). Does willingness to pay for green energy differ by source? Energy Policy, 35(6), 3327–3334.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Bradford, D., Courtemanche, C., Heutel, G., McAlvanah, P., & Ruhm, C. (2014). Time preferences and consumer behavior (National Bureau of Economic Research Working Paper 20320).

    Google Scholar 

  • Braungardt, S., Molenbroek, E., Smith, M., Williams, R., Attali, S., & McAlister, C. (2014). Impact of eco-design and energy/tyre labelling on R&D and technological innovation (ECOFYS, Project Number: DESNL13606).

    Google Scholar 

  • Brounen, D., & Kok, N. (2011). On the Economics of Energy Labels in the Housing Market. Journal of Environmental Economics and Management, 62(2), 166–179.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Brown, R., Webber, C., & Koomey, J. (2002). Status and future directions of the ENERGY STAR program. Energy, 27(5), 505–520.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Camilleri, A. R., & Larrick, R. P. (2014). Metric and scale design as choice architecture tools. Journal of Public Policy and Marketing, 33(1), 108–125.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Carlson, A., & Palmer, C. (2016). A qualitative meta-synthesis of the benefits of eco-labeling in developing countries. Ecological Economics, 127, 129–145.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Carrico, A. R., & Riemer, M. (2011). Motivating energy conservation in the workplace: An evaluation of the use of group-level feedback and peer education. Journal of Environmental Psychology, 31(1), 1–13.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Clark, C. F., Kotchen, M. J., & Moore, M. R. (2003). Internal and external influences on pro-environmental behavior: Participation in a green electricity program. Journal of Environmental Psychology, 23(3), 237–246.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • CLASP., et al. (2017). Closing the “reality gap” – Ensuring a fair energy label for consumers.

    Google Scholar 

  • Client Earth. (2011). Environmental claims on supermarket seafood: Improving product labelling & consumer protection. London: ClientEarth.

    Google Scholar 

  • Codagnone, C., Bogliacino, F., & Veltri, G. (2013). Testing CO2/Car labelling options and consumer information. Report for the European Commission, Brussels.

    Google Scholar 

  • Cohen, M. A., & Vandenbergh, M. P. (2012). The potential role of carbon labeling in a green economy. Energy Economics, 34, S53–S63.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • COSA. (2013). The COSA measuring sustainability report: Coffee and Cocoa in 12 countries. In The Committee on Sustainability Assessment. Philadelphia, PA.

    Google Scholar 

  • Davis, L. W., & Metcalf, G. E. (2014). Does better information lead to better choices? Evidence from energy-efficiency labels (National Bureau of Economic Research Working Paper 20720).

    Google Scholar 

  • Demirel, P., & Kesidou, E. (2012). Stimulating different types of eco-innovation in the UK: Government policies and firm motivations (STPS Working Papers 1203). Ankara, Turkey: STPS—Science and Technology Policy Studies Center, Middle East Technical University.

    Google Scholar 

  • ECORYS, Tilburg University, & GfK. (2014). Study on the effects on consumer behaviour of online sustainability information displays. Report for the European Commission, Brussels. https://doi.org/10.2759/52063

  • ECORYS, Tilburg University, & GfK. (2015). Milan BExpo 2015: A behavioural study on food choices and eating habits. Report for the European Commission, Brussels. https://doi.org/10.2838/537411

  • ECOS. (2017). The revised energy labelling regulation. Brussels.

    Google Scholar 

  • Eichholtz, P., Kok, N., & Quigley, J. M. (2010). Doing well by doing good? Green office buildings. American Economic Review, 100(5), 2492–2509.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Eichholtz, P., Kok, N., & Quigley, J. M. (2013). The economics of green building. Review of Economics and Statistics, 95(1), 50–63.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • EVER. (2005). Evaluation of EMAS and eco-label for their revision (Report 1: Options and recommendations for the revision process. 26.12.2005 Part B: The EU Eco-label).

    Google Scholar 

  • Fuerst, F., & McAllister, P. (2011). Eco-labeling in commercial office markets: Do LEED and energy star offices obtain multiple premiums? Ecological Economics, 70(6), 1220–1230.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Galarraga, I. (2002). The use of eco-labels: A review of the literature. Environmental Policy and Governance, 12(6), 316–331.

    Google Scholar 

  • Gerarden, T. D., Newell, R. G., & Stavins, R. N. (2017). Assessing the energy-efficiency gap. Journal of Economic Literature, 55(4), 1486–1525.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Gillingham, K., Newell, R. G., & Palmer, K. (2009). Energy efficiency economics and policy. Annual Review of Resource Economics, 1, 597–620.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Gruère, G. (2013). A characterisation of environmental labelling and information schemes (OECD environment working papers, No. 62). Paris: OECD Publishing

    Google Scholar 

  • Harding, M., & Hsiaw, A. (2014). Goal setting and energy conservation. Journal of Economic Behavior and Organization, 107(Part A), 209–227.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Horbach, J., Rammer, C., & Rennings, K. (2012). Determinants of eco-innovations by type of environmental impact—The role of regulatory push/pull, technology push and market pull. Ecological Economics, 78, 112–122.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Houde, S. (2017). Bunching with the stars: How firms respond to environmental certification. American Economic Journal: Economic Policy (Revise and Resubmit).

    Google Scholar 

  • Houde, S. (2018). How consumers respond to product certification and the value of energy information. The Rand Journal of Economics, 49, 453–477. https://doi.org/10.1111/1756-2171.12231.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Ipsos MORI, London Economics, & AEA. (2012). Research on EU product label options. Report for the European Commission, Brussels.

    Google Scholar 

  • Iraldo, F., & Barberio, M. (2017). Drivers, barriers and benefits of the EU ecolabel in European companies’ perception. Sustainability, 9(5), 751.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • ISO. (1999). ISO 14021. Environmental labels and declarations – Self-declared environmental claims (Type II environmental labelling). Geneva: International Organization for Standardization.

    Google Scholar 

  • ISO. (2000). ISO 14020. Environmental labels and declarations – General principles. Geneva: International Organization for Standardization.

    Google Scholar 

  • ISO. (2006). ISO 14025. Environmental labels and declarations – Type III environmental declarations – Principles and procedures. Geneva: International Organization for Standardization.

    Google Scholar 

  • Jacobsen, G., Kotchen, M. J., & Vandenbergh, M. P. (2012). The behavioral response to voluntary provision of an environmental public good: Evidence from residential electricity demand. European Economic Review, 56(5), 946–960.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Kahn, M. E., & Kok, N. (2014). The capitalization of green labels in the California housing market. Regional Science and Urban Economics, 47, 25–34.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Kjeldsen, U. B., Wied, M., Lange, P., Tofteng, M., & Lindgaard, K. (2014). The Nordic Swan and companies. It is worthwhile to acquire the swan label? Copenhagen, Denmark: Nordic Council of Ministers.

    Book  Google Scholar 

  • Klintman, M. (2016). A review of public policies relating to the use of Environmental Labelling and Information Schemes (ELIS) (OECD Environment Working Papers, No. 105). Paris: OECD Publishing.

    Google Scholar 

  • Kortelainen, M., Raychaudhuri, J., & Roussillon, B. (2016). Effects of carbon reduction labels: Evidence from scanner data. Economic Inquiry, 54(2), 1167–1187.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Kotchen, M. J., & Moore, M. R. (2007). Private provision of environmental public goods: Household participation in green-electricity programs. Journal of Environmental Economics and Management, 53(1), 1–16.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Larrick, R. P., & Soll, J. B. (2008). The MPG Illusion. Science, 320(5883), 1593–1594.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • London Economics, & IPSOS. (2014). Study on the impact of the energy label and potential changes to it – On consumer understanding and on purchase decisions. Report for the European Commission, Brussels.

    Google Scholar 

  • Michaud, C., Llerena, D., & Joly, I. (2013). Willingness to pay for environmental attributes of non-food agricultural products: A real choice experiment. European Review of Agricultural Economics, 40(2), 313–329.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Molenbroek, E., Smith, M., Groenenberg, H., Waide, P., Attali, S., Fischer, C., et al. (2014). Final technical report: Evaluation of the energy labelling directive and specific aspects of the eco-design directive (Project Number: BUINL13345), ECOFYS.

    Google Scholar 

  • Murray, A. G., & Mills, B. F. (2011). Read the label! energy star appliance label awareness and uptake among U.S. consumers. Energy Economics, 33(6), 1103–1110.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Newell, R. G., & Siikamäki, J. (2014). Nudging energy efficiency behavior: The role of information labels. Journal of the Association of Environmental and Resource Economists, 1(4), 555–598.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Newell, R. G., & Siikamäki, J. (2015). Individual time preferences and energy efficiency. American Economic Review, 105(5), 196–200.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • OECD. (2011). Fisheries and aquaculture certification. Paris: OECD Publishing. https://doi.org/10.1787/9789264119680-en

    Book  Google Scholar 

  • OECD. (2017). Tackling environmental problems with the help of behavioral insights. Paris: OECD Publishing. https://doi.org/10.1787/9789264273887-en

    Book  Google Scholar 

  • Ottman, J. (2011). The new rules of green marketing. San Francisco: Barrett-Koehler.

    Google Scholar 

  • Park, J. Y. (2017). Is there a price premium for energy efficiency labels? Evidence from the Introduction of a Label in Korea. Energy Economics, 62, 240–247.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Potts, J., Lynch, M., Wilkings, A., Huppé, G. A., Cunningham, M., & Voora, V. A. (2014). The state of sustainability initiatives review 2014: Standards and the green economy. Winnipeg, MB: International Institute for Sustainable Development.

    Google Scholar 

  • Prag, A., Lyon, T., & Russillo, A. (2016). Multiplication of Environmental Labelling and Information Schemes (ELIS): Implications for environment and trade (OECD Environment Working Papers, No. 106). Paris: OECD Publishing.

    Google Scholar 

  • RESOLVE. (2012). Steering committee of the state-of-knowledge assessment of standards and certification. Toward sustainability: The roles and limitations of certification. Washington, DC: RESOLVE.

    Google Scholar 

  • Rubik, F. (2015). Life cycle management: Labelling, declarations and certifications at the product level–different approaches. In Life cycle management (pp. 65–77). Dordrecht: Springer.

    Google Scholar 

  • Sallee, J. M. (2014). Rational inattention and energy efficiency. Journal of Law and Economics, 57(3), 781–820.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Sanstad, A. H., & Howarth, R. B. (1994). Consumer rationality and energy efficiency. Proceedings of the ACEEE, 1, 175–183.

    Google Scholar 

  • Schubert, R. & Stadelmann, M. (2016). Energy-using durables: Driving forces of purchase decisions. Report for the Swiss Federal Office of Energy, Bern.

    Google Scholar 

  • Schultz, P. W., Nolan, J. M., Cialdini, R. B., Goldstein, N. J., & Griskevicius, V. (2007). The constructive, destructive, and reconstructive power of social norms. Psychological Science, 18(5), 429–434.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Shewmake, S., & Viscusi, W. K. (2015). Producer and consumer responses to green housing labels. Economic Inquiry, 53(1), 681–699.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Teisl, M. F., Roe, B., & Hicks, R. L. (2002). Can eco-labels tune a market? Evidence from dolphin-safe labeling. Journal of Environmental Economics and Management, 43(3), 339–359.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • U.S. Environmental Protection Agency. (2015). Learn about the Fuel Economy Label. https://www.epa.gov/greenvehicles/learn-about-fuel-economy-label

  • U.S. EPA (Environmental Protection Agency), Office of Inspector General. (2008). Improvements needed to validate reported ENERGY STAR benefits (Report No. 09-P-0061). Washington, DC.

    Google Scholar 

  • UNEP. (2005). The trade and the environmental effects of ecolabels: Assessment and response. http://wedocs.unep.org/handle/20.500.11822/8313

  • Ungemach, C., Camilleri, A. R., Johnson, E. J., Larrick, R. P., & Weber, E. U. (2017). Translated attributes as choice architecture: Aligning objectives and choices through decision signposts. Management Science, 64(5), 2445–2459.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Vanclay, J. K., Shortiss, J., Auselbrook, S., Gillespie, A. M., Howell, B. C., Johanni, R., Maher, M. J., Mitchell, K. M., Stewart, M. D., & Yates, J. (2011). Customer response to carbon labelling of groceries. Journal of Consumer Policy, 34(1), 153–160.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Wagner, M. (2008). Empirical influence of environmental management on innovation: Evidence from Europe. Ecological Economics, 66, 392–402.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Walls, M., Palmer, K., Gerarden, T., & Bak, X. (2013). Is energy efficiency capitalized into home prices? Evidence from three U.S. cities (pp. 13–18). Resources for the Future Discussion Paper.

    Google Scholar 

  • Wächter, S. M., Sütterlin, B., & Siegrist, M. (2015). The misleading effect of energy efficiency information on perceived energy friendliness of electric goods. Journal of Cleaner Production, 93, 193–202. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jclepro.2015.01.011.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Wächter, S. M., Sütterlin, B. & Siegrist, M. (2016). Investigating energy-friendly consumer behavior: The role of labels, information, and decision-making strategies in the context of energy consumption. Report for the Swiss Federal Office of Energy, Bern.

    Google Scholar 

  • Ward, D. O., Clark, C. D., Jensen, K. L., Yen, S. T., & Russell, C. S. (2011). Factors influencing willingness-to-pay for the ENERGY STAR® label. Energy Policy, 39(3), 1450–1458.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Wiser, R., Bolinger, M., & Holt, E. (2000). Customer choice and green power marketing: A critical review and analysis of experience to date. Proceedings of the ACEEE 2000 Summer study on energy efficiency in buildings.

    Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Centre for European Economic Research (ZEW), Mannheim, Germany

    Albert Roger

Authors
  1. Albert Roger
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Albert Roger .

Editor information

Editors and Affiliations

  1. Faculty of Business, Augsburg University of Applied Sciences, Augsburg, Germany

    Jens Horbach

  2. Centre for European Economic Research (ZEW), Mannheim, Germany

    Christiane Reif

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

Copyright information

© 2018 Springer International Publishing AG, part of Springer Nature

About this chapter

Check for updates. Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this chapter

Roger, A. (2018). Outlook: Can Environmental Product Standards Enable Eco-Innovation?. In: Horbach, J., Reif, C. (eds) New Developments in Eco-Innovation Research. Sustainability and Innovation. Springer, Cham. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-93019-0_5

Download citation

Publish with us

Policies and ethics

Search

Navigation