How credible labels are created: The ClimatePartner labels

by Dennis Uieß, Head of Methodologies & Standards

Sustainability labels are under intense scrutiny today. Consumers, legislators, and civil society rightly demand that companies make their climate claims transparent, scientifically sound, and free from greenwashing.

ClimatePartner has embraced this responsibility. Our "ClimatePartner certified" and "Financial climate contribution" labels were developed through a structured, multi-stage stakeholder process. We involved internal expert teams, customers, and independent experts from academia, civil society, and public authorities.

This aligns with the EU Directive on Empowering Consumers for the Green Transition [(EU) 2024/825, the Empowering Consumers Directive, or EmpCo], which will apply from September 27, 2026. The directive also requires that the criteria for sustainability label schemes be developed in consultation with relevant stakeholders.

Who was involved?

Both internal and external stakeholders contributed to the development process.

Internal stakeholders

We initiated the development of the label criteria in June 2022. From the outset, we involved all relevant departments:

Research and Development / Chief Commercial Officer: Project leadership, methodological development, and ensuring the scientific robustness of the criteria

Consulting Services, Customer Management: Practical feedback on feasibility from the customer perspective, sector-specific requirements

Climate project experts: Technical assessments of contribution requirements and project quality standards

Sales: Market and competitive perspective, commercial viability

Legal: Monitoring regulatory compliance and ensuring legally robust criteria definitions

External stakeholders

In parallel with internal development, we gathered external perspectives:

Customers: More than 30 companies of varying sizes and sectors from Europe and the US contributed to the label strategy, from SMEs to large corporations in consumer goods, manufacturing, and retail.

NGOs: From the fields of environmental protection, consumer protection, and business.

Academia: An independent research institute provided impartial scientific assessments.

Process facilitation: The Collaborating Centre on Sustainable Consumption and Production (CSCP) moderated the external dialogue process as a neutral party, bringing over 15 years of experience in multi-stakeholder processes.

How did ClimatePartner structure the dialogue?

Internal engagement formats

The internal development process began in June 2022 with the involvement of senior management and all relevant department heads. In July 2022, we presented the new label strategy for the first time at a company-wide all-hands meeting, followed by an open Q&A session for all employees.

In August and September 2022, cross-departmental workshops with sales and customer management teams followed, organised by industry group. From autumn 2022 onward, monthly "Ask Me Anything" sessions gave all departments an ongoing platform for questions and suggestions for improvement. A company-wide champion network with representatives from each team ensured the feedback process was embedded across the organisation. All feedback was collected and evaluated centrally.

External engagement formats

We incorporated external perspectives in three sequential phases, facilitated by the CSCP:

Scoping (Summer 2022): In a SWOT workshop, CSCP and ClimatePartner jointly identified the key strengths, weaknesses, opportunities, and risks of the label concept. In parallel, we consulted selected customers through one-on-one interviews and online workshops on the draft criteria.

Bilateral Expert Interviews (2023): CSCP conducted approximately ten confidential one-on-one interviews with representatives from NGOs, research institutes, and public authorities. The goal was to gather detailed feedback from diverse societal perspectives and explore willingness for constructive, ongoing dialogue.

Trilateral Round-Table Meetings (2023): In facilitated discussions in a ClimatePartner–NGO–CSCP format, participants explored the key topics in greater depth.

What did we discuss?

The feedback from all engagement formats provided valuable input for shaping the final label criteria. Key topics included:

Transparency and consumer communication: Stakeholders highlighted the full disclosure of all relevant information on calculations and measures via the Climate ID website as an important quality feature. They suggested incorporating the product use phase more prominently into carbon accounting and making communication more accessible for consumers.

Emissions reduction: External stakeholders—particularly NGOs—welcomed the inclusion of clear, measurable reduction requirements in the label. This paradigm shift away from a pure offsetting focus (the former "climate neutral" label) was reinforced through the stakeholder dialogue and is now a central element of "ClimatePartner certified."

Contribution rather than neutrality claims: Various stakeholders viewed the approach of the "Financial climate contribution" label, calculating the carbon footprint and making a financial climate contribution without claiming climate neutrality, as a meaningful approach beyond neutrality promises.

Quality of climate projects: Stakeholders discussed requirements around third-party verification, project types, and the measurability of actual climate impact.

Continuous development

The stakeholder dialogue is an ongoing process. ClimatePartner continues to collect and evaluate feedback from diverse stakeholders—both internal and external—and incorporates it into the further development of the label criteria.

Credible climate action is built on ambitious goals that are consistently implemented. An independently verified label makes this commitment visible and traceable. This is how the credibility that the EmpCo Directive demands of sustainability claims is achieved.