Home / 出版物 / CMS Green Globe / Sustainability claims and greenwashing in China / 中国 - 可持续性声明和绿色清洗

中国 - 可持续性声明和绿色清洗

中国在环保方面的政策发展与洗绿行为的相关监管和监督 

中国对于环境问题的讨论已持续多年,近年来,中国政府监管力度和企业对环保责任的认正在稳步提高。中央政府的“十四五”规划中制定了生态目标,即“促进生态友好型工作和生活方式在全社会范围内推广”。中央政府制定了美丽中国建设目标,要求加快发展方式绿色转型,持续深入推进污染防治攻坚,提升生态系统多样性稳定性持续性,开展美丽中国建设全民行动。在国家政策的支持、实施和宣传下,中国企业对环保问题的关注程度日益提高,消费者的绿色产品意识和参与碳普惠等机制的环保意识逐渐增加,中国正在逐渐形成以实现人与自然和谐共生现代化为导向的建设新格局。 

以下是中国企业在经营中值得关注的三个重要趋势,包括制度发展、舆论监测和消费者意识等方面。 

1. 环保相关法律和法规体系正在不断改善,对于洗绿行为正在加强监管 

中国与生态环境有关的规定散布在不同的法律法规中,但中国正在积极推动生态环境法典的编纂,初步分为以消除现行法律中矛盾和冲突、提高污染控制法律规范的系统性的污染控制编,整合优化涉及生态要素保护以及特定区域保护的立法的自然生态保护编,以及补充完善绿色低碳发展法律规范、整合和发展绿色低碳相关法律的绿色低碳发展编,并将应中国的双碳目标和国际应对气候变化公约的相关要求,制定原则性规范。

在中国,相关环境信息披露制度正在逐步建立。例如,中国生态环境部已于2021年制定《企业环境信息依法披露管理办法》和相关改革方案。与此同时,中国证券投资基金业协会于2018年颁布了《绿色投资指引(试行)》,并就基金管理人自我评估报告框架提出建议。2021年,中国人民银行(下称“人行”)、国家发展和改革委员会(下称“发改委”)和中国证监会联合颁布了《支持绿色债券项目目录》。人行于2021年7月22日发布了《金融机构环境信息披露指南》。中国银保监会于2022年6月1日发布了《银行保险业绿色金融指引》。这些指南涉及“是否有定期披露绿色投资产品的环保程度”,将提供更完整的标准来评估“绿色投资产品”的合规性。

2021年工业和信息化部印发《“十四五”工业绿色发展规划》,其中要求推动修订《节约能源法》《循环经济促进法》《清洁生产促进法》等法律法规。2023年,生态环境部和市场监管总局发布了《温室气体自愿减排交易管理办法(试行)》,2024年国务院发布了《碳排放权交易管理暂行条例》。除了全国性的法规,一些经济发展水平较高的城市和省份正在率先制定全面的生态保护立法。深圳于2021年9月率先实施《深圳经济特区生态环境保护条例》。该条例将碳达峰和碳中和纳入生态环境保护的整体布局,并授权深圳市政府制定重点行业的碳排放强度标准。它还扩展到碳排放强度超过行业准入负面清单标准的建设项目。此外,重庆于2022年8月被选为绿色金融改革创新试验区建设用地,计划包括完善重大环境风险信息披露制度,探索建立负面信息分类管理机制等。同时,环境信息公开将与绿色项目申请挂钩,加强部门间联动,防止洗绿行为出现。2023年上海市生态环境局印发《上海市碳普惠管理办法(试行)》,对减碳行为进行量化和赋予一定价值,并运用商业激励、政策支持、市场交易等方式推动建立绿色低碳生产生活方式。

目前中国并未出台针对洗绿行为的单一立法。目前非法洗绿行为由不同领域的法律法规来规范。例如,企业通过洗绿广告欺骗消费者的行为可以构成虚假宣传,违反了《广告法》、《反不正当竞争法》和《消费者权益保护法》。此外,如果企业的产品不符合绿色认证标准,还将违反《产品质量法》、《绿色市场认证管理条例》和《绿色市场认证实施细则》。

同时,对于那些不仅无益于环境、而且还造成污染的企业,可能会引起相应的环境违规问题,并受到行政处罚。如《促进绿色消费实施方案》(发改委等6部门2022年1月18日发布)规定,中国将严厉打击绿色低碳产品虚假标识行为,并将相关行政处罚等信息纳入全国信用信息共享平台和全国企业信用信息公示系统。此外,根据国家发改委、人行和生态环境部2016年发布的《关于对环境保护领域失信生产经营单位及有关人员开展联合惩戒的合作备忘录》,可以对失信主体采取多样化的联合惩戒措施,如禁止环境失信企业参与政府采购活动、限制获得政府供应的土地、限制发行企业债券和公司债券等。如果企业因进行洗绿营销而受到行政处罚,将会阻碍其其他重要的商业活动。

在司法层面,最高人民法院重视上市公司和发债企业等未按照企业环境信息披露管理要求,公布企业碳排放量、排放设施等碳排放信息等案件,要求引导企业主动适应绿色低碳发展要求,强化环境责任意识,依法及时、真实、准确、完整披露环境信息。 

2.  中国媒体和非政府组织正不断加强舆论监督 

中国媒体正在为环境监督做出贡献,敦促企业承担起环境保护的责任。

2009年,《南方周末》开始发布 “中国洗绿榜”。这份名单上的条目基于10个标准,包括公然欺骗、故意隐瞒和双重标准等。该榜单会列出那些对环境责任作出承诺但实际上没有履行这些责任的前10家公司。在这些名单中,有著名的中央企业,如中国石油,以及知名的外国公司,如苹果公司和阿迪达斯。此外,中央电视台也会在每年的“315”消费者权益保护日晚会上曝光一些比较典型的不环保的企业行为。

非政府组织比如公众环境研究中心(IPE)也在近年来与多方一起推动企业碳信息的公开披露,并通过发布绿色供应链CITI指数年度报告以及供应链气候行动CATI指数年度报告,将全价值链的减排以及综合进展置于社会监督之下。

这种媒体和非政府组织的关注度的提高督促了被曝光的企业进行自查和整改,舆论的监督和维护商誉的愿望也在一定程度上促使知名企业更加积极主动地履行环境责任。 

3.  消费者的环保意识正在提高,但仍需加强宣传和引导

《绿色食品标志管理办法》规定未经中国绿色食品发展中心许可,任何单位和个人不得使用绿色食品标志。实践中,由于社会上对环境保护的宣传不足,人们对绿色食品的安全性缺乏了解,消费者会倾向于更加信任大公司的品牌和产品,这让更多的企业趁机施行洗绿行为。自新冠肺炎疫情爆发以来,公众对绿色、清洁、低碳、节能的消费意识明显增强,部分原因是中国对公共卫生的重视程度提高,且各个年龄段和各行业的人购买绿色产品的比例都在逐步增加。但在提高消费者对于绿色产品的认识和选购绿色产品方面,还有很长的路要走。

中国环境标志产品认证委员会2019年在上海进行的公众绿色消费调查结果显示,只有25%的消费者表示能够辨别绿色产品的真伪,58%的消费者对绿色产品完全感到困惑。根据中国生态环境部环境与经济政策研究中心发布的《公民生态环境行为调查报告(2020年)》,对于阻碍公众选购绿色产品的因素,调查报告认为,无法识别绿色产品、产品质量没保证是阻碍公众购买绿色产品的主要原因,同时产品价格和类型因素也影响了公众购买。一半以上的受访者认为阻碍自己选购绿色产品的主要原因是“不知道哪些是绿色产品,缺乏推荐信息”和“市场管理不到位、绿色产品质量没保证”。因此,在加强宣传绿色产品、引导消费者选购绿色产品方面,相关部门依然可采取更多措施进行宣传和引导。

 

主要联系人

Nick Beckett 的照片
贝 宁科
管理合伙人
北京及香港办公室管理合伙人,亚太地区知识产权及生命科学与医疗健康业务领域主管
律师
北京
T +86 10 8527 0287

Subscribe to CMS Green Globe newsletter

Discover related products


02/10/2023
Expert Guide on ESG in Real Estate
In the ever-evolving landscape of real estate development, investment, and operation, a remarkable surge in ESG (environmental, social, and governance) regulatory activity is reshaping the sector. With these changes come new and vital requirements th
Comparable
09/04/2024
CMS Expert Guide to plastics and packaging laws
 Plastics and packaging have attracted  consumer, media and legislative interest over recent years with an array of laws being proposed to incentivise behavioural and design change. Significant reforms are expected globally to deal with environmental
Comparable
06/12/2023
Green Claims & Green(er) Products
21/08/2023
European Commission publishes European Sustainability Reporting Standards...
On 31 July 2023, the European Commission published the first set of the European sustainability reporting standards (ESRS). This is the first big step towards the implementation of the Corporate Sustainability Reporting Directive (CSRD), which came i
16/03/2022
Greenwashing: reputations on the line
As global heating and other environmental issues have come to the forefront of public consciousness in recent years, with extreme weather events and increasingly urgent warnings about the damage humans are doing to the planet, consumers have taken a greater interest in the environmental impact of the products they buy and use. Dozens of surveys have revealed that consumers prefer envi­ron­men­ta­lly-frien­dly products, and that they are willing to pay a premium to get them. Naturally, business have responded to this concern, with brand-owners increasingly highlighting the benign or even beneficial effects their products and services have on the natural world. However, environmental issues are highly technical, and therefore raise a significant risk of confusing and misleading consumers, who may be persuaded to part with their cash to obtain products whose environmental benefits may be less than they appear. A European Commission website screening project, which reported in January, found that green claims were exaggerated, false or deceptive in 42% of cases, and more than half the time the information provided was i­na­de­qua­te. 2021 therefore saw an increased focus from regulators on misleading green claims. In the UK, the Competition and Markets Authority recently published a new Green Claims Code, setting out six key principles for traders to follow when making environmental claims, together with over 100 pages of examples and more detailed advice, and has implied that enforcement in this area may follow soon in 2022. The Advertising Standards Authority recently carried out a review of its regulation of green claims regulation, announcing its decisions following the first stage of its review in September. In January 2021 the Netherlands Consumer and Markets Authority published Guidelines on Sustainability Claims, and in August 2021, the French government issued its Climate and Resilience Law. Similar developments are in train across Europe. Given the level of public concern about the environment, we expect that a finding that a business has been misleading consumers about its environmental credentials has the potential to be even more damaging to its reputation than other advertising breaches. Here are some key points to remember when making green claims. 1. Be clear Environmental claims are often technical and complex. Where terms are unclear, explain what you mean by them. Use appropriate qualifications and clarifications in the ad – significant qualifications should not be on a separate web page or another location where they are likely to go unread – but remember that these must be genuine qualifications of clarifications, and may not contradict the main claim. Avoid industry jargon, or explain it when used. 2. Be specific Identify the specific environmental benefit of your product or service and state it clearly. Avoid terms like “su­stai­na­ble”, “green”, “envi­ron­men­ta­lly friendly”, “e­co-frien­dly” or “kind to the planet”, which are largely meaningless. Comparative claims, such as “more sustainable” or “greener”, may be acceptable if you explain the specific environmental benefit clearly. A claim made for a product or service generally should be based on a “cra­dle-to-g­rave” assessment, taking into account the environmental effects of inputs such as raw materials, water and electricity, manufacturing, transport, use and end-of-life disposal. Even with more narrowly-framed claims, make sure you consider all aspects – a common pitfall is to claim that packaging is recyclable or plastic free, without considering whether inner packaging, glue or tape, all of which form part of the packaging, meet that description. 3. Limit your claims to what you can prove Start with the evidence you have, and work out what claims you can make based on that evidence. A common pitfall is to start with the claim and then cast about for evidence to support it, which often leads to a broader claim than can be substantiated. If you have taken waste out of the supply chain, limit your claim to the supply chain. If you have reduced CO2 emissions from transport, limit your claim to transport. 4. Su­bstan­tia­tion should be thorough and detailed Because they are often technical and detailed, environmental claims may require in-depth substantiation, and you may need to expend significant time and effort compiling it. For example, claims regarding carbon neutrality or reduced carbon require a thorough survey of a business’s operation and supply chain over a significant period, first to determine its baseline carbon emissions and then to track its progress towards reduced carbon or carbon neutrality. Be aware that terms such as “bio­de­g­ra­da­ble”, “organic”, “renewable”, “co­mpo­sta­ble”, “recycled”, “re­cycla­ble”, “reusable” and “car­bon-neu­tra­l” have specific technical meanings, and be ready to substantiate them accordingly. Substantiation by reference to an independent test standard, such as ISO 14021 on self-declared environmental claims, tends to be more persuasive than a standard developed in-house. Take care with symbols, which have specific meanings and rules for use. Make sure evidence is up to date. Make sure claims are accurate for normal use of the products, or qualify them accordingly – for example, if a product is only biodegradable in a specialist facility, and is likely to go to landfill where it will not degrade any quicker than normal products, do not claim “bio­de­g­ra­da­ble”, or at least state that specialist facilities are required. 5. Don’t claim normal product features, or things you are required to do by law, as environmental benefits For example, in the UK, rinse-off toiletry products may not contain micro beads. Claiming such products are “micro bead free” is misleading, as it implies that the products have a particular environmental advantage over other products, which they do not. 6.  Take care with comparisons Comparative advertising raises its own specific issues, and, where it refers to a competitor or its product or service by name, can substantially heighten risks by opening up the possibility of trademark infringement. Make sure you compare like with like – the comparison should be of products or services meeting the same needs or intended for the same purpose. The features compared should be material and representative, and also “ve­ri­fia­ble”, which requires the detailed basis of the comparison to be disclosed proactively, either in the advertising itself or by way of a “signpost” in the ad directing readers to the source of information.