The New Era of Sustainability Communication Based on Evidence and Transparency

This new landscape affects the way businesses, organizations, destination management entities, and digital platforms communicate their sustainability commitments, progress, and achievements. It also increases the need to clearly explain what a certification verifies, the scope of that certification, and the evidence that supports every sustainability-related message.

This New Landscape Is Transforming Sustainability Communication

Those who regularly follow our work may have noticed some changes in the way we present information on our blog, social media channels, and the Biosphere system's websites. These changes do not reflect a shift in our identity or purpose, but rather an evolution toward sustainability communication that is more precise, understandable, and verifiable.

This adaptation responds to the new European regulatory landscape, but also to an international trend that extends well beyond Europe's borders. Today, it is no longer enough to state that an activity incorporates sustainability criteria. It is equally important to explain what has been evaluated, the scope of that evaluation, the evidence that supports it, and how that information can be verified.

This is the approach that the Responsible Tourism Institute (RTI), as the owner and organization responsible for the development, review, and ongoing revision of the Biosphere Scheme, and Biosphere Responsible Tourism, S.L. (BRT), as the independent certification body authorized to operate the scheme and issue Biosphere Certification following a favorable certification decision for a specific certification level and scope, have been developing for many years. The objective has been to establish an assessment and communication model based on defined requirements, independent audits, documented evidence, and continuous improvement.

How Is Sustainability Communication Changing?

This new landscape is leading to a more precise way of communicating sustainability. For this reason, we continue to improve our digital channels so that each piece of content clearly identifies who has been certified, the scope of the certification, the evidence supporting it, and the period during which it remains valid.

These changes represent the first steps in adapting to a new regulatory, informational, and social landscape. Over the coming months, we will continue to enhance the way information is organized, presented, and made available, with the goal of making it increasingly clear, accessible, and useful for certified organizations, consumers, and all other stakeholders. Our channels and tools will continue to evolve, but the principle guiding this process will remain the same: to provide sustainability communication based on verifiable, contextualized, and understandable information.

In keeping with this objective, and to support informed reading, we have included at the end of this article the principal official sources that support the regulatory references used throughout, as well as a glossary of key terms to provide additional context, clarify the current meaning of the concepts used, and help readers better understand their significance in this context.

A European Framework for Clearer, More Reliable, and Verifiable Information

Directive (EU) 2024/825 amends Directive 2005/29/EC on unfair commercial practices and Directive 2011/83/EU on consumer rights. With regard to sustainability-related claims, it does not regulate the overall sustainability performance of an activity. Rather, it addresses specific commercial practices carried out by traders in their relationships with consumers, including actions or omissions directly related to the promotion, sale, or supply of goods and services.

The protection provided under this framework applies before, during, and after a commercial transaction. In September 2026, the European Commission published a Questions and Answers document to promote the consistent application of the new provisions. In addition, in June 2026, the Consumer Protection Cooperation (CPC) Network agreed on common criteria for addressing, in a proportionate and case-by-case manner, the marketing of products and packaging manufactured or placed on the market before September 27, 2026.

It is important to remember that the specific scope of the obligations, the competent authorities, enforcement procedures, and the consequences of any potential non-compliance depend on the national legislation implementing the Directive and on its application by each Member State. For this reason, this article is provided solely for informational and guidance purposes and does not replace the legal analysis that may be required for any particular communication, market, or specific situation.

In practice, businesses should review their websites, marketing campaigns, social media content, commercial materials, product or service descriptions, and any other communications disseminated through third parties that form part of their commercial practices directed at consumers. As a preventive measure, other organizations may also wish to review their public sustainability communications to ensure that the information presented is clear, relevant, reliable, and supported by verifiable evidence.

Among other considerations, it is advisable to:

• Avoid broad environmental claims unless they can be adequately substantiated.
• Clearly specify the organization, activity, service, or time period to which each claim refers.
• Support communications about results or improvements with specific, up-to-date, and verifiable information.
• Avoid presenting future commitments as if they were already achieved.
• Clearly explain the scope and basis of any sustainability labels or certifications used.

Ultimately, one of the most significant changes affects not only the content of sustainability messages, but also the way they are presented, the context in which they are interpreted, and the ability to support them with objective and verifiable information.

What Does This Mean for Sustainability Certifications?

Directive (EU) 2024/825 provides that sustainability labels must not be displayed unless they are based on a certification scheme or have been established by a public authority. To meet this requirement, a certification scheme must satisfy a number of conditions, including transparent criteria, access under fair and non-discriminatory conditions for organizations capable of meeting those criteria, consultation with relevant stakeholders during the scheme's development, and the existence of monitoring mechanisms carried out by an independent third party that is separate from both the owner of the certification scheme and the organization using the label.

This framework does not constitute automatic recognition of any specific certification, nor does it mean that holding a sustainability label authorizes an organization to make any sustainability-related claim. Responsibility for communications remains with the organization using the certification, which must accurately identify the scope of the certification and support any additional claims regarding results or improvements with specific, up-to-date, and verifiable information.

Accordingly, the value of a certification lies not only in the existence of the label itself, but also in the ability to explain which requirements have been assessed, what process was followed, what the scope of the certification decision is, and what evidence enables that decision to be properly understood and interpreted.

Biosphere Certification in the New Era of Sustainability Communication

Having explained the conditions that the new European regulatory framework establishes for certification schemes and sustainability labels, it is appropriate to examine how these principles are applied within the Biosphere Scheme. To do so, it is important to clearly distinguish who develops the Scheme, who assesses conformity and makes certification decisions, and how the certification level, scope, and supporting evidence for each certificate are defined.

Under the Biosphere Scheme, developed by the Responsible Tourism Institute (RTI), Biosphere Responsible Tourism, S.L. (BRT) certifies businesses, organizations, and public or private entities responsible for the tourism management of destinations through a single Biosphere Certification.

For businesses, Biosphere Certification is structured into two cumulative certification levels. The first is the Committed level, which certifies conformity with the ten basic requirements of the Biosphere Scheme, known as the Starters. To obtain this level, a business must provide verifiable evidence demonstrating compliance with each of these requirements and successfully complete the corresponding audit, after which Biosphere Responsible Tourism (BRT) makes the certification decision. Its scope is more limited than that of the Certified level and should not be presented as equivalent to it. Achieving the Committed level is a prerequisite for a business to undergo the audit required for the Certified level.

By contrast, entities responsible for the tourism management of destinations do not progress through the Committed level. Their certification process is directed straight to the Certified level.

The Responsible Tourism Institute (RTI) owns the Biosphere Scheme and is responsible for its development, review, and ongoing revision. Biosphere Responsible Tourism, S.L. (BRT), as the independent certification body authorized to operate the Scheme, conducts the audit, assesses conformity, and makes decisions regarding the granting, maintenance, suspension, or withdrawal of certification. The RTI does not participate in the evaluation of supporting evidence or in certification decisions concerning individual organizations. This separation of responsibilities helps preserve the independence of the certification process and the objectivity of certification decisions.

To obtain Biosphere Certification at the Certified level, an organization must demonstrate conformity with the applicable requirements of the Biosphere Scheme, based on its category and the scope submitted for evaluation.

The Biosphere Scheme establishes the rules governing conformity assessment. It defines the applicable requirements, the audit procedure, the independence requirements for the audit team, the supporting evidence required, and the ongoing surveillance system. It also establishes the conditions governing the validity, renewal, maintenance, suspension, and, where applicable, withdrawal of certification.

Certification is subject to a periodic surveillance process to ensure that no more than twelve months elapse between evaluations. During each surveillance review, it is verified that the organization continues to meet the minimum requirements associated with its certification level and that the documented evidence remains valid and up to date. It is not necessary to complete all of the activities available on the platform, provided that the required criteria continue to be met and the surveillance evaluation is successfully completed. Otherwise, the certification level may be reviewed in accordance with the provisions of the Biosphere Scheme.

Accordingly, the development and ongoing revision of the Biosphere Scheme are the responsibility of the Responsible Tourism Institute (RTI), while conformity assessment and certification decisions are the responsibility of Biosphere Responsible Tourism, S.L. (BRT), ensuring a clear separation between the organization that develops the requirements and the organization that verifies compliance with them.

Digital Platforms and the Communication of Sustainability Certifications

The need to communicate the scope of a certification accurately does not apply solely to an organization's own communication channels. It also extends to third-party digital platforms that display sustainability labels or information in search engines, booking platforms, online travel agencies, and other commercial environments.

Across these channels, certifications should be presented in a manner that is consistent with the certified entity, the scope of the certification, and its period of validity, even though their inclusion, format, updates, or visibility depend on the criteria, procedures, and policies established by each platform operator.

When these platforms act as traders or present consumers with information related to a commercial practice, it is particularly important that the use of environmental claims and sustainability labels accurately reflects the actual scope of the certification and does not give rise to misleading interpretations.

Accordingly, the new regulatory framework reinforces the need for sustainability-related communications to be clear, relevant, and supported by verifiable information, including when they are disseminated through digital intermediaries.

However, each platform applies its own criteria for incorporating, displaying, or recognizing third-party certifications. The national measures implementing Directive (EU) 2024/825 do not guarantee the presence or visibility of any particular certification on platforms such as Booking.com, Google Travel, Expedia, or similar services. What they do reinforce is the requirement that any sustainability label used as part of a commercial practice directed at consumers be presented in a manner that is consistent with its scope and with the information that has actually been assessed.

In addition to their public profile in the Biosphere Sustainable repository, certified organizations may have their Biosphere Certification displayed on Booking.com and on other channels that recognize the Biosphere certification mark. This recognition is not based on a self-declaration by the organization itself, but on third-party certification. Conformity with the requirements of the Biosphere Scheme is assessed by a certification body that is independent of both the owner of the Scheme and the certified organization, based on verifiable evidence and subject to periodic surveillance. This type of independent verification is what platforms displaying sustainability labels seek, and it is also what the new European regulatory framework requires for a sustainability label to be displayed to consumers.

Accordingly, a valid Biosphere Certification enables an organization to be represented on these channels with a certification mark supported by an independent assessment and publicly accessible information. Its actual visibility depends on the certification remaining valid, the organization's information matching the data held by each platform, and the technical and commercial criteria established by each platform operator, which retains sole discretion over its publication, placement, and continued display.

Accordingly, holding a valid certification may facilitate the identification of an organization on platforms that recognize this type of certification system. However, it does not confer an automatic right to publication, visibility, ranking, or continued display, as these decisions remain solely within the discretion of each platform in accordance with its own policies and procedures.

Sustainability Communication Is Built on Verifiable Information

The evolution of the European regulatory framework reflects a trend that is already evident across many sectors. Increasingly, what matters is not only what an organization communicates about its sustainability commitments, but also its ability to provide context for that information and support it with verifiable evidence.

In this environment, trust depends not only on the existence of sustainability-related initiatives, but also on how those initiatives are documented, reviewed, and communicated. Organizations need structured, up-to-date, and accessible information that enables stakeholders to understand what actions have been taken, the scope of those actions, and the evidence on which they are based.

As a result, communication is no longer simply an exercise in disseminating information. Instead, it becomes the final stage of a broader process that begins with planning, continues through the implementation of initiatives, incorporates the collection of supporting evidence, and concludes with the presentation of information that is clear, contextualized, and verifiable.

This approach is particularly important when sustainability labels are used or when communicating results related to environmental, social, or governance matters. In these cases, precise language, a clear definition of scope, and the availability of supporting information become essential.

Communicating Is Not Just About Informing—It's Also About Providing Context

One of the most significant changes introduced by the new regulatory landscape affects not only the content of sustainability communications, but also the way those messages are presented and how they may be interpreted by consumers and other stakeholders.

Properly explaining an initiative means identifying who is carrying it out, the activity to which it relates, the period during which it applies, and the elements that help define its scope. Likewise, when referring to a sustainability certification, it is important to explain which organization has been evaluated, what the certification covers, and which activities fall within its scope.

Providing this context does not diminish the value of the information. On the contrary, it helps ensure that the information is interpreted correctly, prevents expectations that cannot be substantiated, and strengthens the credibility of the communication.

From this perspective, transparency is not about communicating more information. It is about communicating information that is relevant, understandable, and sufficiently contextualized to support an accurate interpretation.

Here is your text translated into natural, grammatically correct American English (US), preserving the original structure, meaning, legal precision, and institutional tone without adding or removing content.

The Scope of a Certification Is Also Part of the Message

In many cases, people consulting a certification focus solely on the existence of the certification mark. However, to fully understand its significance, it is also necessary to understand the scope of the assessment on which it is based.

In the case of Biosphere Certification, the scope is determined by the type of certified organization, the activities included in the evaluation process, and the conditions established under the Biosphere Scheme. Accordingly, the certification confirms conformity only with respect to the evaluated scope and should not be interpreted as an assessment of elements outside that scope.

Explaining this aspect helps ensure more rigorous communication that is consistent with the principles of transparency underlying Directive (EU) 2024/825. It also enables consumers and other stakeholders to better understand what a certification actually represents and what information can legitimately be derived from it.

Clearly defining the scope also promotes the appropriate use of sustainability labels and reduces the risk of overly broad interpretations or conclusions that extend beyond what has actually been evaluated.

Continuous Improvement Should Also Be Reflected in Sustainability Communication

Continuous improvement is one of the core principles underlying many management systems and conformity assessment frameworks. From a communication perspective, this principle requires organizations to periodically review published information to ensure that it remains accurate, up to date, and consistent with the organization's current practices.

This includes reviewing website content, marketing materials, social media posts, corporate presentations, and any other communications that reference sustainability or certifications obtained in the past.

Conducting these periodic reviews enables organizations to adapt their communications to regulatory changes, newly available evidence, modifications to the scope of a certification, or developments in the organization's own activities.

In this way, continuous improvement is no longer viewed solely as a management principle. It also becomes a quality standard for sustainability communication.

Transparency Strengthens Trust

Trust is one of an organization's most valuable assets. In the field of sustainability, that trust is built progressively through information that is clear, consistent, and supported by verifiable evidence.

Organizations that establish procedures to document their activities, periodically review the information they publish, and provide appropriate context for their communications are better positioned to meet the growing expectations of consumers, public authorities, financial institutions, tourism operators, and other stakeholders.

Beyond regulatory compliance, this approach to communication can help strengthen institutional credibility, support informed decision-making, and foster relationships built on transparency.

Responsible sustainability communication is not simply about conveying positive messages. Above all, it is about providing accurate, proportionate, and verifiable information that enables stakeholders to clearly understand what commitments have been made, how they are being implemented, and what their scope and limitations are.

Transparency and Public Access to Certification Information

In the new regulatory landscape, transparency is no longer a complementary element; it has become one of the cornerstones of responsible sustainability communication. For certified organizations, making information publicly available regarding the certification holder, certification level, certification status, validity period, and evaluated scope enables communications to be verified and helps ensure consistency between the verified evidence, the use of the certification mark, and the messages communicated through websites, marketing campaigns, social media, and third-party platforms.

Biosphere Responsible Tourism (BRT) has established, through the Biosphere Sustainable online platform, a public repository linked to the certification services it provides. This repository is not part of the Biosphere Scheme and does not belong to the Responsible Tourism Institute (RTI). Rather, it is a tool developed and maintained by BRT that provides information about certifications granted to organizations for which conformity with the applicable requirements has been verified and a favorable certification decision has been made.

The purpose of the repository is to provide consumers and other stakeholders with a publicly accessible means of consulting the information available in each organization's profile regarding the certification status, validity period, and scope of certification. To this end, BRT includes references to these profiles in its communication materials and in the resources provided to certified organizations. The information published is limited to the data available in each case and is subject to the applicable conditions, limitations, and updates.

Accordingly, BRT's role extends beyond simply communicating the existence of a certification. It also includes measures designed to facilitate access to information regarding the certification's scope and validity, promote transparency, and provide contextualized information about the matters that have been assessed. This functionality forms part of the certification services provided by BRT and enables users to consult, where the information is available and applicable, details such as the identity of the certification holder, the certification level awarded, the certification status and validity period, the matters included within the certified scope, the documented actions, and the areas to which those actions relate. The publication of this information does not imply a general assessment of the organization's overall environmental performance or sustainability beyond the specific scope of the certification.

In this regard, Directive (EU) 2024/825 reinforces the importance of ensuring that communications directed at consumers concerning sustainability labels are based on information that is clear, relevant, and reliable, and that they do not mislead consumers regarding the scope or effects of the certification. This regulatory framework reinforces an approach that BRT had already adopted before the Directive entered into force. In particular, BRT has structured its communications to help end consumers understand the scope of each certification and distinguish between information covered by the independent assessment and other statements made by the certified organization that fall outside the certification process.

The implementation of the national measures transposing Directive (EU) 2024/825 reinforces the need for organizations to communicate with precision, avoid overly broad claims, and provide accessible supporting evidence. In this context, Biosphere Certification and the public Biosphere Sustainable repository can help organizations meet these expectations when they are used in a manner consistent with the certified scope and the information that has actually been evaluated.

However, responsibility for each communication remains with the organization that makes it. For this reason, before publishing sustainability-related messages or using the certification mark on an organization's own channels or through third-party platforms, it is advisable to verify that the current documentation, the organization's public certification profile, and the applicable requirements in each market adequately support the information being communicated.

Beyond the European Union: An International Trend

Although Directive (EU) 2024/825 represents one of the most significant regulatory developments affecting sustainability communication within the European market, the move toward more rigorous environmental claims is by no means limited to the European Union. Around the world, a converging trend is emerging toward communications that are clearer, more specific, and supported by evidence, along with increased scrutiny of claims that could mislead consumers.

The shared objective of these initiatives is not to limit organizations' ability to communicate their sustainability progress, but rather to ensure that sustainability-related claims are understandable, properly contextualized, and clearly identify what is being claimed, the specific subject to which the claim relates, and the basis on which it is made.

This evolution can be observed, although through different regulatory approaches, across a number of international markets.

In the United Kingdom, the Digital Markets, Competition and Consumers Act 2024 (DMCC Act) regulates unfair commercial practices directed at consumers. Its consumer protection provisions came into force on April 6, 2025. In parallel, the Competition and Markets Authority (CMA) has developed specific guidance on environmental claims through the Green Claims Code, a compliance guide that supports the application of the legislation without constituting a separate law. Subsequently, on January 22, 2026, the CMA published additional guidance intended to help businesses make appropriate environmental claims throughout the supply chain.

In Canada, the Competition Act, as amended in 2024 by Bill C-59, provides that certain environmental claims used to promote products, services, or business activities must not be false or misleading and must be properly substantiated. An amendment introduced on March 26, 2026, removed the specific requirement to use an internationally recognized methodology for certain environmental claims, while maintaining the obligation that such claims be adequately supported and not misleading.

In Australia, the Australian Consumer Law (ACL), contained within the Competition and Consumer Act 2010 (CCA), prohibits misleading conduct and false or deceptive representations. The Australian Competition and Consumer Commission (ACCC) publishes specific guidance on the application of these obligations to environmental and sustainability claims. Although this guidance does not constitute separate legislation, it has become particularly significant following updates to the penalty regime applicable to certain corporate violations, which took effect on March 28, 2026.

These examples do not establish a single international regulatory framework, nor do they impose identical requirements across all jurisdictions. Each organization must assess the applicable legislation, the guidance issued by the relevant authorities, and the specific requirements of the markets in which it operates or communicates.

Nevertheless, they do illustrate a common trend. Broad, ambiguous, or insufficiently substantiated claims are gradually giving way to communications that are more precise, properly contextualized, and supported by verifiable information. For organizations operating internationally, working with clearly defined criteria, documented evidence, independent assessment processes, and a clearly defined certification scope can help promote more consistent communication across markets, without in any way replacing the legal analysis required in each jurisdiction.

The International Value of Biosphere Certification

In a landscape characterized by increasing expectations regarding sustainability communication, certification systems based on defined requirements, independent assessment processes, and verifiable evidence are becoming increasingly important.

As explained above, Biosphere Certification is founded on a clear separation of responsibilities. The Responsible Tourism Institute (RTI) owns the Biosphere Scheme and is responsible for its development, maintenance, and ongoing revision. Biosphere Responsible Tourism (BRT), in turn, acts as the independent certification body responsible for conducting conformity assessments and making decisions regarding the granting, maintenance, renewal, suspension, or withdrawal of certification.

This model enables consistent criteria to be applied to businesses, organizations, and public or private entities responsible for the tourism management of destinations both within and outside the European Union, according to the type of organization being evaluated and the specific scope defined during the certification process. The international application of the Biosphere Scheme does not, by itself, imply its regulatory recognition in other countries or its equivalence to the legal requirements applicable in any particular jurisdiction.

Here is your text translated into natural, grammatically correct American English (US), preserving the original structure, meaning, legal precision, and institutional tone without adding or removing content.

Building on this foundation, certified organizations have a structured framework for communicating their certification more transparently and consistently across different markets. The requirements that are assessed are established by the Biosphere Scheme developed by the Responsible Tourism Institute (RTI); conformity is determined through an independent assessment conducted by Biosphere Responsible Tourism (BRT); and information relating to the certified organization, the certification level achieved, the scope of certification, its validity period, and its certification status is publicly available.

These elements can help customers, tourism operators, digital platforms, public authorities, and other stakeholders better understand the meaning of the certification and access objective information about what has actually been assessed. At the same time, they support communication based on verifiable facts, without replacing the obligation to adapt each message to the applicable legal requirements and market conditions wherever the organization operates.

In this international context, the value of Biosphere Certification lies in providing a structured assessment methodology, an independent certification process, and a set of documented evidence that can support certain sustainability-related communications. By itself, however, it does not constitute automatic compliance with the laws of other countries, recognition by foreign authorities, or a guarantee of acceptance by commercial platforms or tourism intermediaries.

Its value lies in providing an objective foundation on which organizations can build communication that is more rigorous, transparent, and consistent with the scope of the certification obtained. In an international environment where scrutiny of environmental claims continues to increase, having clearly defined assessment processes, publicly available verifiable information, and periodic surveillance mechanisms can help strengthen trust and enhance the credibility of sustainability-related communications.

Official Sources

The references listed below bring together the principal legislative texts and official guidance documents that form the basis of the content presented in this article. They include both the regulatory framework of the European Union and official publications issued by the competent authorities in the United Kingdom, Canada, and Australia concerning environmental claims, consumer protection, certification schemes, and sustainability communication. Consulting these sources makes it possible to verify the scope, context, and current status of the references used throughout this article.

• Directive (EU) 2024/825 (EUR-Lex).
• European Commission information on sustainable consumption and the implementation of the Directive.
• European Commission Questions and Answers on the implementation of Directive (EU) 2024/825.
• Common Position of the Consumer Protection Cooperation (CPC) Network on products and packaging marketed before September 27, 2026.
• Competition and Markets Authority – Green Claims Code.
• Making Green Claims: Getting It Right, Across the Supply Chain.
• Digital Markets, Competition and Consumers Act 2024.
• Competition Bureau Canada – Environmental Claims and the Competition Act.
• Competition Act (Canada).
• Bill C-59.
• Australian Competition and Consumer Commission – Environmental and Sustainability Claims.
• Competition and Consumer Act 2010 and the Australian Consumer Law.

These sources should always be consulted in their current versions and together with the applicable national legislation in each jurisdiction. They are provided as reference materials to help readers understand the criteria adopted by the competent authorities, but they do not replace the legislation itself or the legal analysis that may be required for any specific communication. As this regulatory framework continues to evolve, it is advisable to periodically verify whether new legislation, interpretative guidance, or other official updates have been published.

Glossary of Terms

This glossary brings together the principal legal, technical, and institutional concepts needed to correctly interpret the scope of Directive (EU) 2024/825, understand how Biosphere Certification operates, and provide context for the key terms used throughout this article. It is included because certain terms have specific meanings in the fields of law and conformity assessment that may differ from their everyday usage.

The definitions are provided solely for informational purposes and should be interpreted in conjunction with the applicable legislation, the current documentation of the Biosphere Scheme, and the official sources cited above. Where appropriate, references to EUR-Lex and IATE, the multilingual terminology database of the institutions of the European Union, are included to facilitate consultation of the official terminology in the different languages of the European Union.

Here is the glossary translated into natural, grammatically correct American English (US), preserving the original meaning, structure, legal precision, and institutional terminology.

This glossary is intended to promote a consistent reading of this article and to support a coherent interpretation of the concepts used throughout. The definitions summarize the meaning of the terms as they are used in this content, but they do not replace the applicable legislation, the current technical documentation of the Biosphere Scheme, or the need to verify the specific scope of each certification. In the event of regulatory or methodological updates, the official sources and the current versions of the relevant documents shall always prevail.