Why legally compliant sustainability communication becomes a competitive advantage

Sustainability communication walks a fine line: if phrased too vaguely, it appears implausible and is legally vulnerable; if phrased too technically, it fails to reach the target audience. With EU Directive 2024/825 (EmpCo) and the announced 2026 amendment to the Unfair Commercial Practices Act (UWG), the rules are becoming considerably stricter. What has previously been accepted as ‘standard practice’ in the industry may soon be subject to legal action.

The following five best practices have proven their worth in practice, they reduce legal risk whilst simultaneously strengthening the credibility of your communications.

1. Transparency as a fundamental principle

What this means

The most important principle of sustainable communication: be honest about progress and challenges. Stakeholders value authenticity far more than staged perfection. Companies that also communicate setbacks or unresolved problems come across as more credible than those that paint a flawless picture.

Practical implementation

Publish both achieved targets and ongoing challenges on a company website or in a sustainability report. An honest statement such as “We reduced CO₂ emissions by 23% in 2024, but we are still 8% short of our target for water consumption” is legally and communicatively more robust than simply reporting successes.

Common mistake

Communicating only positive aspects whilst concealing significant negative impacts, this is a classic accusation of greenwashing under Section 5a of the Unfair Competition Act (UWG).

2. Specific rather than vague

What this means

Replace vague statements with measurable targets and results. Terms such as ‘natural’, ‘green’ or ‘eco’ are not clearly definable for either consumers or the courts, and fall under the EmpCo prohibitions on unspecific environmental claims.

Practical implementation

Instead of “We are reducing our CO₂ emissions”, say: “We have reduced our CO₂ emissions by 23% since 2020, based on Scope 1 and 2 according to the GHG Protocol.” Instead of “environmentally friendly packaging”, use: “Packaging made from 80% post-consumer recycled material, with a 15% reduction in material weight compared to 2022.”

Common mistake

Claiming to be “climate neutral” without providing evidence of the offsetting methodology, Article 5 of the Emissions Trading Scheme (ETS) requires supporting documentation to be made available within 30 days.

3. Use recognised certifications

What this means

Independent certifications lend credibility to claims because the verification is carried out by a third party. Self-awarded labels, on the other hand, are suspect, EmpCo Art. 5(1)(f) explicitly covers certification schemes that are not independent.

Practical implementation

Promote certifications such as B Corp, ISO 14001 (environmental management), the EU Ecolabel, the Blue Angel, Science Based Targets (SBTi) or FSC, depending on the product and sector. Provide a link to the certifying body and make the criteria transparent.

Common mistake

In-house “sustainability awards” or “Certified Green” logos without clearly labelling them as in-house seals. Better: label them as such or omit them entirely.

Quick question: How does your communication measure up?

You have now learnt about three of the five best practices, transparency, specificity and certifications. Before we continue: check now whether your website already meets these principles.

On to Best Practice 4:

4. Storytelling with substance

What this means

Tell concrete stories about sustainability initiatives, with measurable results rather than abstract promises. Stories have an emotional impact, but they need a solid core of data to be legally sound.

Practical implementation

Instead of “We are committed to the environment”: describe a specific initiative, including the starting point, the action taken and the result. For example: “In 2023, we switched our logistics to rail transport, this saved 1,200 tonnes of CO₂ per year and reduced transport costs by 18 per cent.” Images, quotes and a link to the detailed case study round it off.

Common mistake

Nature scenes and green images lacking substantive content, Article 5(1)(d) of the EmpCo also covers visual representations that imply environmental claims.

5. Continuous monitoring

What this means

Sustainability communication is not a one-off exercise, but an ongoing process. Websites grow, blog articles are added, product descriptions change, and every new line of text can give rise to a legal risk. Manual reviews are not scalable in the long term.

Practical implementation

Establish a process that regularly checks all public communication channels for greenwashing risks. Tools such as the GreenClaims Manager can systematically scan websites and identify potentially problematic statements, missing evidence or risky imagery. Important: Tools do not replace expert assessment on a case-by-case basis, but they do prioritise risks and document the review process.

Common mistake

A one-off audit at the time of the website’s launch, followed by no systematic maintenance. A compliance audit that is 12 months old no longer reflects the current legal situation.

Conclusion: Five key strategies for legally compliant sustainability communication

Legally compliant sustainability communication follows clear principles: transparency rather than staging, concrete details rather than vagueness, recognised seals of approval rather than in-house logos, stories with substance rather than mere imagery, and continuous monitoring rather than a one-off audit.

Those who apply these five levers significantly reduce legal risks, whilst simultaneously gaining credibility with customers, stakeholders and regulatory bodies. The risk of greenwashing is not inevitable, but rather the result of a lack of systematic approach.

Frequently Asked Questions

What is the most common mistake in sustainability communication?

The use of vague terms such as ‘natural’, ‘green’ or ‘environmentally friendly’ without concrete figures. According to EmpCo and Section 5a of the German Unfair Competition Act (UWG), these terms are unspecific and may result in a warning letter. Better: provide measurable figures, data and sources.

How often should I review my communications?

At least quarterly; immediately in the case of new products or campaigns. Anyone running a growing website should review it monthly, ideally using a combination of automated scans and expert spot checks.

Self-awarded seals, is that even allowed?

Formally possible under the law, but only if clearly labelled as in-house. EmpCo Art. 5(1)(f) covers non-independent certification schemes. Better: rely on recognised external labels or clearly mark your own labels as such.

Is a sustainability strategy worthwhile without certificates?

Yes, certificates are helpful, but not a prerequisite for legally compliant communication. Concrete figures, a verifiable methodology and transparent reporting are often sufficient. Certificates enhance credibility, but do not replace substance.