Outlook: Can Environmental Product Standards Enable Eco-Innovation?

  • Albert RogerEmail author
Part of the Sustainability and Innovation book series (SUSTAINABILITY)


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.


  1. 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.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. Allcott, H. (2011). Social norms and energy conservation. Journal of Public Economics, 95(9–10), 1082–1095.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. 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
  4. Allcott, H., Knittel, C., & Taubinsky, D. (2015). Tagging and targeting of energy efficiency subsidies. American Economic Review, 105(5), 187–191.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. 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.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. Allcott, H., & Sweeney, R. (2014). The role of sales agents in information disclosure: Evidence from a field experiment. Management Science, 63(1), 21–39.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. Allcott, H., & Wozny, N. (2014). Gasoline prices, fuel economy, and the energy paradox. Review of Economics and Statistics, 96(5), 779–795.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. 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.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. 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
  10. Asensio, O. I., & Delmas, M. A. (2017). The effectiveness of U.S. energy efficiency building labels. Nature Energy, 2(4), 17033.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. 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.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. 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
  13. 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.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  14. Blackman, A., & Naranjo, M. A. (2012). Does eco-certification have environmental benefits? Organic coffee in Costa Rica. Ecological Economics, 83, 58–66.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  15. 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.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  16. 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.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  17. 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
  18. 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
  19. 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.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  20. Brown, R., Webber, C., & Koomey, J. (2002). Status and future directions of the ENERGY STAR program. Energy, 27(5), 505–520.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  21. 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.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  22. Carlson, A., & Palmer, C. (2016). A qualitative meta-synthesis of the benefits of eco-labeling in developing countries. Ecological Economics, 127, 129–145.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  23. 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.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  24. 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.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  25. CLASP., et al. (2017). Closing the “reality gap” – Ensuring a fair energy label for consumers.Google Scholar
  26. Client Earth. (2011). Environmental claims on supermarket seafood: Improving product labelling & consumer protection. London: ClientEarth.Google Scholar
  27. Codagnone, C., Bogliacino, F., & Veltri, G. (2013). Testing CO2/Car labelling options and consumer information. Report for the European Commission, Brussels.Google Scholar
  28. Cohen, M. A., & Vandenbergh, M. P. (2012). The potential role of carbon labeling in a green economy. Energy Economics, 34, S53–S63.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  29. COSA. (2013). The COSA measuring sustainability report: Coffee and Cocoa in 12 countries. In The Committee on Sustainability Assessment. Philadelphia, PA.Google Scholar
  30. 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
  31. 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
  32. ECORYS, Tilburg University, & GfK. (2014). Study on the effects on consumer behaviour of online sustainability information displays. Report for the European Commission, Brussels.
  33. ECORYS, Tilburg University, & GfK. (2015). Milan BExpo 2015: A behavioural study on food choices and eating habits. Report for the European Commission, Brussels.
  34. ECOS. (2017). The revised energy labelling regulation. Brussels.Google Scholar
  35. Eichholtz, P., Kok, N., & Quigley, J. M. (2010). Doing well by doing good? Green office buildings. American Economic Review, 100(5), 2492–2509.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  36. Eichholtz, P., Kok, N., & Quigley, J. M. (2013). The economics of green building. Review of Economics and Statistics, 95(1), 50–63.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  37. 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
  38. 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.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  39. Galarraga, I. (2002). The use of eco-labels: A review of the literature. Environmental Policy and Governance, 12(6), 316–331.Google Scholar
  40. Gerarden, T. D., Newell, R. G., & Stavins, R. N. (2017). Assessing the energy-efficiency gap. Journal of Economic Literature, 55(4), 1486–1525.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  41. Gillingham, K., Newell, R. G., & Palmer, K. (2009). Energy efficiency economics and policy. Annual Review of Resource Economics, 1, 597–620.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  42. Gruère, G. (2013). A characterisation of environmental labelling and information schemes (OECD environment working papers, No. 62). Paris: OECD PublishingGoogle Scholar
  43. Harding, M., & Hsiaw, A. (2014). Goal setting and energy conservation. Journal of Economic Behavior and Organization, 107(Part A), 209–227.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  44. 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.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  45. Houde, S. (2017). Bunching with the stars: How firms respond to environmental certification. American Economic Journal: Economic Policy (Revise and Resubmit).Google Scholar
  46. Houde, S. (2018). How consumers respond to product certification and the value of energy information. The Rand Journal of Economics, 49, 453–477. Scholar
  47. Ipsos MORI, London Economics, & AEA. (2012). Research on EU product label options. Report for the European Commission, Brussels.Google Scholar
  48. Iraldo, F., & Barberio, M. (2017). Drivers, barriers and benefits of the EU ecolabel in European companies’ perception. Sustainability, 9(5), 751.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  49. ISO. (1999). ISO 14021. Environmental labels and declarations – Self-declared environmental claims (Type II environmental labelling). Geneva: International Organization for Standardization.Google Scholar
  50. ISO. (2000). ISO 14020. Environmental labels and declarations – General principles. Geneva: International Organization for Standardization.Google Scholar
  51. ISO. (2006). ISO 14025. Environmental labels and declarations – Type III environmental declarations – Principles and procedures. Geneva: International Organization for Standardization.Google Scholar
  52. 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.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  53. Kahn, M. E., & Kok, N. (2014). The capitalization of green labels in the California housing market. Regional Science and Urban Economics, 47, 25–34.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  54. 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.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  55. 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
  56. Kortelainen, M., Raychaudhuri, J., & Roussillon, B. (2016). Effects of carbon reduction labels: Evidence from scanner data. Economic Inquiry, 54(2), 1167–1187.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  57. 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.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  58. Larrick, R. P., & Soll, J. B. (2008). The MPG Illusion. Science, 320(5883), 1593–1594.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  59. 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
  60. 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.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  61. 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
  62. 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.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  63. 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.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  64. Newell, R. G., & Siikamäki, J. (2015). Individual time preferences and energy efficiency. American Economic Review, 105(5), 196–200.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  65. OECD. (2011). Fisheries and aquaculture certification. Paris: OECD Publishing. Scholar
  66. OECD. (2017). Tackling environmental problems with the help of behavioral insights. Paris: OECD Publishing. Scholar
  67. Ottman, J. (2011). The new rules of green marketing. San Francisco: Barrett-Koehler.Google Scholar
  68. 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.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  69. 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
  70. 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
  71. 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
  72. 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
  73. Sallee, J. M. (2014). Rational inattention and energy efficiency. Journal of Law and Economics, 57(3), 781–820.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  74. Sanstad, A. H., & Howarth, R. B. (1994). Consumer rationality and energy efficiency. Proceedings of the ACEEE, 1, 175–183.Google Scholar
  75. Schubert, R. & Stadelmann, M. (2016). Energy-using durables: Driving forces of purchase decisions. Report for the Swiss Federal Office of Energy, Bern.Google Scholar
  76. 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.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  77. Shewmake, S., & Viscusi, W. K. (2015). Producer and consumer responses to green housing labels. Economic Inquiry, 53(1), 681–699.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  78. 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.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  79. U.S. Environmental Protection Agency. (2015). Learn about the Fuel Economy Label.
  80. 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
  81. UNEP. (2005). The trade and the environmental effects of ecolabels: Assessment and response.
  82. 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.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  83. 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.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  84. Wagner, M. (2008). Empirical influence of environmental management on innovation: Evidence from Europe. Ecological Economics, 66, 392–402.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  85. 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
  86. 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. Scholar
  87. 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
  88. 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.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  89. 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

Copyright information

© Springer International Publishing AG, part of Springer Nature 2018

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.Centre for European Economic Research (ZEW)MannheimGermany

Personalised recommendations