The words the directive names
Recital 9 of the directive gives examples of generic environmental claims: “environmentally friendly”, “eco-friendly”, “green”, “nature’s friend”, “ecological”, “environmentally correct”, “climate friendly”, “gentle on the environment”, “carbon friendly”, “energy efficient”, “biodegradable” and “biobased”. Similar statements that suggest excellent environmental performance count too.
The ban is not limited to words. The directive’s definition of an environmental claim covers pictures, symbols, brand names and product names, and the recital adds that colours or images combined with a written claim can make it a generic claim.
When a claim like this can stay
There are two ways out, and both are narrower than they look.
1. You can show recognised excellent environmental performance
That means the product has the EU Ecolabel, a national or regional EN ISO 14024 type I ecolabel officially recognised in a member state, or top environmental performance under other EU law, such as energy class A for “energy efficient”. The performance has to match the claim: the EU Ecolabel does not back “biodegradable” if the label’s criteria for that product say nothing about biodegradability.
2. You make the claim specific on the same page
A claim is not generic when its specification is given in clear and prominent terms on the same medium, which for a shop means the same product page. The directive’s own example: “climate-friendly packaging” is generic; “100% of the energy used to produce this packaging comes from renewable sources” is specific. A specific claim still has to be true and provable.
“Sustainable”, “conscious” and “responsible”
These words go further than the environment. The directive says a trader should not make generic claims such as “conscious”, “sustainable” or “responsible” based only on recognised excellent environmental performance, because they also suggest social qualities. So even a product with the EU Ecolabel cannot simply be called “sustainable”.
What shops actually write
In our scan of 14,775 product texts in 71 online shops on 16 October 2026, 1,063 products in 48 of the 71 shops used at least one environmental word. The texts were in Lithuanian; the table groups each word with its English equivalent.
| Word family | Products | Shops | In context |
|---|---|---|---|
| “sustainable” | 457 | 26 | Usually needs a closer look: banned when nothing on the page says what is sustainable |
| “ecological” | 437 | 34 | Often banned; the legal term on certified organic food (see below) |
| “environmentally friendly”, “nature-friendly” | 181 | 22 | Almost always a banned generic claim |
| “eco” | 82 | 18 | Mostly operating modes, model names or organic ingredients |
| “biodegradable”, “compostable” | 65 | 13 | Needs a closer look: generic unless the page says what breaks down and how |
| “harmless to the environment” | 16 | 5 | Fine when a measured fact follows, such as a refrigerant’s GWP value |
When we read a sample of 128 of these sentences in context, “environmentally friendly” was a likely banned claim in 21 of 30 cases and never plainly fine. “Eco” was the opposite: 11 of 15 were operating modes, model names or certified organic ingredients rather than claims. That is why a list of words cannot tell you which texts to change.
When “eco” or “organic” is not the problem
The directive defines an environmental claim as a message that is not mandatory under EU or national law. Two common cases fall outside it.
Certified organic food
EU organic rules (Regulation (EU) 2018/848) reserve terms such as “organic”, “bio” and “eco”, and their equivalents in every EU language, for certified organic products. On a certified product, the term states the certification; on any other product it is banned anyway.
Names required by EU law
EU ecodesign rules require dishwashers and washing machines to offer an “eco” programme under that name. Naming it is a legal requirement, not a claim. Calling the whole machine “eco” is a claim.
Rewrites that keep the facts
The fix is usually to delete the vague word and keep the facts that are already in the text. Two typical patterns:
Banned “Mattress cover with a zip, meets OEKO-TEX Standard 100, environmentally friendly and suitable for babies”
Fix “Mattress cover with a zip, meets OEKO-TEX Standard 100 and suitable for babies”
The label covers tested harmful substances, not the environment, so it does not back “environmentally friendly”. The label stays; the generic words go.
Banned “Eco-friendly reusable drinking bottle made of stainless steel”
Fix “Reusable drinking bottle made of stainless steel”
“Reusable” and “stainless steel” are checkable facts, so they stay.
More guides
Sources
This guide summarises EU law for shop owners. It is not legal advice; for a legal opinion on your texts, ask a lawyer.