Directive (EU) 2024/825, which will begin to apply on September 27, 2026, will mark a turning point in the way businesses communicate sustainability. Environmental claims, sustainability labels, and any statements related to environmental performance must be clear, verifiable, and easy for consumers to understand.
Although this change affects all sectors of the economy, it is particularly significant for organizations whose value proposition incorporates sustainability as a key differentiator, including those in tourism, hospitality, retail, food and beverage, mobility, manufacturing, and services. Discover the key areas businesses should review to communicate with greater transparency, reduce the risk of greenwashing, and prepare for a new era built on trust and verifiable evidence.
In a previous article, we examined how Directive (EU) 2024/825 will mark a turning point in the way sustainability is communicated across the European Union. In this article, we take the discussion a step further by focusing on one of its most practical implications: the review of environmental claims used by businesses across all sectors and the changes that should be made before September 2026.
Sustainability has become one of the most important competitive advantages for a growing number of organizations. Businesses across a wide range of industries—including tourism, food and beverage, retail, manufacturing, mobility, energy, and technology—are increasingly incorporating messages about their environmental commitments into their communication and brand positioning strategies.
Expressions such as “sustainable company,” “eco-friendly product,” “responsible hotel,” “environmentally responsible experience,” “carbon neutral,” and “sustainable packaging” have become commonplace in advertising campaigns, websites, social media, corporate reports, and marketing materials. However, the landscape is changing.
Beginning on September 27, 2026, the implementation of Directive (EU) 2024/825, known as the Empowering Consumers for the Green Transition Directive, will strengthen consumer protection against misleading environmental claims and establish a new framework for communicating sustainability with greater clarity, transparency, and rigor.
The goal is not to prevent businesses from talking about sustainability. Quite the opposite.
The objective is to ensure that what they communicate can be clearly understood, is based on objective criteria, and is supported by verifiable evidence.
In this new landscape, sustainability is no longer just a point of commercial differentiation—it is also a matter of credibility. And that credibility will increasingly depend on an organization's ability to prove what it communicates.
Although tourism is one of the sectors where sustainability plays the most prominent role in marketing communications, the new regulation applies to any business that uses environmental messages to promote its products, services, or activities.
The European Directive is intended to prevent commercial practices that could mislead consumers through claims that are vague, exaggerated, or insufficiently supported.
This means that any organization using environmental claims, environmental statements, or sustainability labels should review how this information is presented to the public.
Today, environmental messages appear across virtually every communication channel.
Each of these channels represents a point of contact with consumers, customers, investors, or public authorities.
And each of them must communicate information that is clear, consistent, and verifiable.
One of the most significant aspects of the Directive is that it broadens the way greenwashing is understood.
A company may carry out genuine environmental initiatives and still create a misleading impression if it communicates them through claims that are overly broad or difficult to interpret.
There is not always a deliberate intent to mislead. In many cases, the problem arises because an organization oversimplifies its communications, relies on commonly used market language, or repeats expressions that have long been considered standard practice.
Simply stating, “We are a sustainable company,” provides very little meaningful information to consumers.
By contrast, explaining which aspects of the business have been evaluated, what methodology is used, what objectives are being pursued, and who verifies the results provides much richer context and inspires greater trust.
The difference may seem subtle, but it is precisely this distinction that represents one of the most significant changes introduced by the new European regulatory framework.
The best way to prepare for this new regulatory landscape is to conduct a systematic review of your organization's environmental communications.
Rather than waiting until the Directive takes effect, businesses are encouraged to use the coming months to identify potential risks, update their messaging, and strengthen the evidence supporting every environmental claim.
Although every organization is different, there are several common areas that should be reviewed in advance.
The first step is to identify every sustainability-related claim that appears in the company's communications.
It is not enough to review the company website. Businesses should also examine:
In many cases, environmental messages created years ago remain in use without ever having been reviewed, even though they may now require a more complete explanation.
For example, a tourism business promoting “sustainable experiences,” a manufacturer advertising “eco-friendly products,” or a logistics company claiming to provide “green transportation” should ask what those statements actually mean and what supporting information is available to substantiate them.
The goal is not to eliminate these messages.
It is to strengthen them with information that is more precise, understandable, and verifiable.
One of the most significant changes introduced by Directive (EU) 2024/825 is the need to move away from generic claims toward environmental communications that are far more precise.
For years, expressions such as “sustainable company,” “green hotel,” “eco-friendly product,” “responsible restaurant,” “environmentally responsible experience,” and “company committed to the planet” have been part of the standard language used by many organizations.
These expressions are not prohibited under the new regulation. What changes is how they must be communicated.
Sustainability is no longer viewed as a broad, generic concept. Instead, it is understood as a set of specific actions that can be described, measured, and explained.
The more specific the information provided, the greater the trust it will inspire.
The real challenge is to transform a marketing message into information that is genuinely useful to the people receiving it.
For example:
Before: "We are a sustainable company."
After: "Our organization operates a management system that incorporates energy efficiency measures, water conservation, responsible purchasing, waste management, engagement with the local community, and continuous improvement processes evaluated through verifiable performance indicators."
Before: "Our hotel is environmentally friendly."
After: "Our property implements measures to optimize energy consumption, reduce waste, improve accessibility, support local purchasing, and apply management practices aligned with the United Nations Sustainable Development Goals (SDGs)."
Before: "We manufacture eco-friendly products."
After: "Our manufacturing processes incorporate ecodesign principles, reduce raw material consumption, and support continuous improvement documented through environmental performance indicators."
As these examples illustrate, the difference is not simply a matter of adding more information.
It is about clearly explaining what the claim actually means.
One of the simplest yet most important questions every organization should ask before communicating any environmental commitment is:
Can we substantiate what we are saying?
The answer to this question is one of the cornerstones of the new approach to sustainability communication.
Every environmental claim or statement related to environmental performance should be supported by sufficient evidence to substantiate its content.
This evidence may take many different forms. For example:
Not every organization will require the same volume of documentation. However, every organization should be able to explain the source of the information it uses to communicate its sustainability efforts.
In addition, evidence plays an important role in strengthening an organization's reputation. Organizing and maintaining supporting documentation not only helps businesses prepare for the new European regulatory framework, but also improves internal management.
Many companies carry out highly positive sustainability initiatives that receive little or no attention because the supporting information is scattered across different departments.
Centralizing this documentation improves coordination among sustainability, communications, operations, quality, marketing, and executive leadership.
At the same time, it enables organizations to respond more quickly to requests for information about their environmental performance from customers, public authorities, investors, and other stakeholders.
Ultimately, strong documentation practices become a competitive advantage.
Sustainability labels, such as Biosphere Certified, are among the elements that inspire the greatest confidence among consumers and travelers.
However, that confidence depends on the transparency of the system behind the certification.
Directive (EU) 2024/825 places particular emphasis on this issue by restricting the use of environmental labels that are not based on transparent systems with publicly available criteria, a verifiable methodology, and independent oversight mechanisms, unless they have been established by a public authority.
As a result, many organizations will need to review not only the certifications they use, but also the way they present them.
Displaying a logo without explaining what it represents provides far less value today than accompanying it with a brief explanation of the evaluation system that supports it.
Before including an environmental certification in any communication material, organizations are encouraged to consider the following questions:
When the answer to these questions is yes, the certification carries significantly greater value from the standpoint of transparency and trust.
Climate-related claims will likely be among the most closely scrutinized under the new European regulatory framework.
Expressions such as “carbon neutral,” “net zero,” “zero emissions,” “climate neutral,” and “zero climate impact” will need to be communicated with particular care and precision.
In many cases, these claims have traditionally been based on carbon offsetting mechanisms through the purchase of carbon credits.
The new European approach focuses on preventing these offsetting practices from creating a misleading impression about the actual climate impact of an organization's activities.
This does not mean that carbon offsetting will lose its value. Rather, it means that offsetting measures will need to be explained more transparently and clearly distinguished from the organization's actual emissions reductions.
Instead of simply stating that a company is “carbon neutral,” it is far more informative to explain:
Providing this type of information enables consumers to better understand an organization's climate commitments and significantly strengthens the credibility of its environmental communications.
One of the most common challenges organizations face is not a lack of environmental commitment, but rather a lack of coordination among the teams involved in developing and approving communications.
Marketing, communications, sustainability, quality, operations, executive leadership, and even legal and compliance departments may work according to different criteria if there is no shared process for reviewing environmental messages before they are published.
The implementation of Directive (EU) 2024/825 makes this coordination particularly important.
The goal is not to slow down the communications process. It is to ensure that every environmental claim published by the organization is based on consistent standards, supported by verifiable evidence, and accurately reflects reality.
An increasing number of organizations are integrating sustainability into their corporate governance policies.
In this context, environmental communication is no longer solely a marketing function. It has become a cross-functional process that requires the involvement of multiple areas of the business.
Establishing an internal review and approval process offers several important benefits:
Ultimately, good governance also means communicating with accuracy and integrity.
Before launching a campaign with a slogan such as "Travel Sustainably," an organization should ask itself:
The same approach applies across every industry.
A food manufacturer, a fashion brand, or a technology company should ask these same questions before using any environmental claim.
Before revising every message used by an organization, it can be helpful to conduct an initial assessment.
Although each organization will apply its own methodology, we suggest, as an example, a simple tool: creating an internal matrix that evaluates each environmental claim from four perspectives:
This exercise helps prioritize actions and organize the review process.
|
Environmental Claim |
Channel |
Available Evidence |
Risk Level |
Recommended Action |
|
Sustainable company |
Website |
Current certification without a public explanation of its scope |
Medium |
Expand the information about the criteria that have been evaluated. |
|
Carbon neutral |
Digital campaign |
Primarily based on carbon offsets |
High |
Review and revise the claim. |
|
Reduced energy consumption |
ESG Report |
Comparable performance indicators and an internal audit |
Low |
Maintain the claim and reinforce it with supporting data. |
|
Eco-friendly product |
Packaging |
Partial documentation |
Medium |
Review the scope of the claim. |
|
Responsible experience |
Sales catalog |
Internal best practices |
Medium |
Explain the specific actions that support the claim. |
The objective is not to create a complex document. Rather, the real value lies in obtaining an overall view of the organization's environmental communications and identifying those messages that should be strengthened before the end of September 2026.
This new European regulatory landscape highlights a reality that goes beyond regulatory compliance itself.
Sustainability can no longer be understood merely as a set of good intentions or as a point of differentiation within a company's marketing strategy.
Increasingly, organizations will need to demonstrate that their sustainability commitments are part of a structured, measurable management system capable of continuous improvement.
It is precisely in this context that methodologies such as the one developed by Biosphere become especially relevant.
Beyond the visible recognition that certification provides, its true value lies in helping organizations integrate sustainability into their day-to-day operations through objective processes, verifiable performance indicators, and planning focused on continuous improvement.
Developed by the Responsible Tourism Institute (RTI), the Biosphere methodology provides a comprehensive framework that enables businesses and organizations to structure their sustainability strategies from a holistic perspective.
Through a digital platform, organizations can plan initiatives, organize supporting evidence, monitor their commitments, and systematically document the progress they make.
This approach helps transform sustainability from a series of isolated actions into an ongoing management process built on evaluation, continuous improvement, and transparency.
One of the distinguishing features of the Biosphere methodology is its alignment with the United Nations Sustainable Development Goals (SDGs) and ESG criteria (Environmental, Social, and Governance).
This alignment enables each organization's sustainability initiatives to be connected to a widely recognized international framework.
At the same time, it helps organizations respond to the growing demand for information from customers, public authorities, financial institutions, investors, and other stakeholders.
As a result, sustainability is no longer communicated solely through broad statements. Instead, it is expressed through a common language based on objectives, performance indicators, and measurable results.
Within the framework established by Directive (EU) 2024/825, the value of a certification system no longer lies solely in the ability to display a certification mark.
Its true value lies in enabling organizations to demonstrate more clearly what actions they are taking, how those actions are evaluated, and what mechanisms they use to ensure continuous improvement.
From this perspective, Biosphere Certified represents much more than a certification.
It is a management process that helps organizations organize information, strengthen the traceability of supporting evidence, improve environmental communications, and build trust among consumers, customers, and other stakeholders.
In a landscape where environmental claims must become increasingly precise and verifiable, having a robust methodology in place can become a strategic advantage for any organization seeking to communicate sustainability with transparency and credibility.
In preparation for the implementation of Directive (EU) 2024/825, Biosphere plans to host an educational webinar during the second half of September 2026 for businesses, organizations, and professionals interested in understanding how sustainability communication will evolve under the new European regulatory framework.
The session will provide a practical overview of the Directive's key changes and will cover topics such as reviewing environmental claims, the use of sustainability certifications and labels, the importance of verifiable evidence, and recommendations for adapting corporate communications to a more transparent approach that aligns with the evolving expectations of consumers and other stakeholders.
The webinar will also feature practical examples, real-world use cases, and guidance to help organizations review their environmental messaging and build greater trust through communications that are more rigorous, evidence-based, and fact-driven.
The date, time, and registration details will be announced soon through Biosphere's official communication channels.
The implementation of Directive (EU) 2024/825 should not be viewed simply as a new regulatory obligation. Above all, it represents an opportunity to improve the quality of sustainability communications.
Organizations that begin reviewing their messaging, organizing their supporting evidence, and strengthening their internal processes now will be better prepared by September 2026.
But beyond regulatory compliance, they will be building something even more valuable: trust. Because sustainability will no longer be only about commitments. It will also be about credibility.
And credibility is built when what an organization communicates can be demonstrated clearly, objectively, and transparently.
Over the past several years, sustainability has evolved from a concept primarily associated with environmental issues into a strategic driver of competitiveness, innovation, and organizational reputation.
Today, consumers, customers, public authorities, financial institutions, investors, and other stakeholders expect far more comprehensive information about the real impact of businesses and the way they manage their environmental, social, and governance commitments.
In this context, communicating sustainability is no longer simply about explaining what an organization intends to do.
It is about demonstrating what it is actually doing—and communicating that through information that is clear, understandable, verifiable, and supported by appropriate context.
Transparency is no longer an added value. It has become one of the fundamental pillars of corporate communication.
The organizations best positioned to succeed in this new landscape will not necessarily be those that use the most sustainability-related messaging.
They will be the ones capable of supporting every claim with data, performance indicators, methodologies, and evidence that clearly demonstrate the true scope of their commitments.
In this new paradigm, environmental claims will no longer be viewed as simple marketing tools. Instead, they will become meaningful sources of information designed to help consumers make informed decisions.
This shift will benefit both organizations and society.
Businesses that operate responsibly will be able to communicate their progress with greater credibility.
Consumers will have access to clearer information, enabling them to make more informed choices.
And the market as a whole will move toward a model of competition built on transparency and trust.
Although much of the discussion has focused on compliance with a new regulation, the true significance of this transformation goes far beyond regulatory requirements.
Directive (EU) 2024/825 promotes a cultural shift in the way organizations approach sustainability. It encourages businesses to:
From this perspective, the new regulation does not restrict environmental communication. It improves it.
It makes environmental communication more useful for consumers, more robust for organizations, and more aligned with the challenges of a sustainability-driven economy.
Sustainability will continue to be one of the greatest drivers of economic and social transformation over the coming decades. However, the way it is communicated is evolving.
Organizations that want to maintain the trust of consumers, customers, and other stakeholders will need to move toward communications built on verifiable evidence, transparent processes, and a continuous improvement approach capable of supporting every commitment they make.
Because going forward, the difference will no longer lie simply in claiming that a company is sustainable.
The difference will lie in proving it.
And that ability to communicate with transparency, rigor, and credibility will likely become one of the key factors shaping an organization's reputation and competitiveness in the years ahead.