Cosmetics and greenwashing: Not everything has to be ‘eco’
As a buyer of natural cosmetics, I have always been skeptical of the green marketing used by regular manufacturers. I think it is good that the EU is putting a stop to greenwashing with new rules. Hopefully, there are other selling points.
I’m one of those people who, before buying a new face cream or lipstick, first turn the tube round and check the ingredients listed on the back. With the help of the app «CodeCheck», I try to avoid certain ingredients – and give priority to those of natural origin. That’s why I’ve been using mainly natural cosmetics for more than ten years.
As a buyer of natural cosmetics, a certain feeling has accompanied me time and again – and with increasing frequency – whilst beauty shopping: mistrust. This would surface whenever I peered out from my ‘green oasis’ – the modest shelf section dedicated to natural cosmetics – into the ‘ «’ forbidden realm» of mainstream manufacturers.
The «forbidden realm» has, in recent years, treated itself to a green makeover. Suddenly, slogans began to appear there too, touting «natural» formulations or «clean» ingredients. The packaging has also undergone a transformation. According to the labels, shampoo and conditioner bottles were suddenly produced in a climate-neutral way, «recyclable» or even already recycled. At some point, it was no longer just the tubes from Weleda, Farfalla or Biokosma that were adorned with leaves and green details.
Out of curiosity, I kept taking a closer look at a few of these products. Perhaps the range of products I could consider was actually starting to expand? Unfortunately not. My naive hope was usually nipped in the bud. Despite the packaging appearing green, the products contained ingredients that, for me as a buyer of natural cosmetics, did not fit with a «green» product: for example, petroleum-based ingredients such as paraffins, microplastics or synthetic substances suspected of have an oestrogenic effect.
Source: Shutterstock/Alive Color Stock
The environmental claims on the packaging weren’t always reliable either. Just recently, the Changing Markets Foundation had criticised the recycling and refill promises made by L’Oréal, P&G and L’Occitane. Among other things, it criticised misleading claims regarding the proportion of packaging that is recyclable and questioned the environmental benefits of refill pouches that are difficult to recycle.
If you want to advertise as green, you have to deliver now
Why were these manufacturers able to present themselves as so green without providing verifiable evidence for their claims or actually using more environmentally friendly packaging? A quiet resentment accompanied me for several years as I made my rounds through the supermarket or the chemist’s.
Until three weeks ago – when my frustration was apparently heard. By the European Union, in fact. Because a new regulation tackles precisely this topic. I was clearly not the only one bothered by the fact that certain brands were adorning themselves with supposedly green credentials.
Since 27 September, the new requirements of the EmpCo Directive have been in force. Their aim – amongst other things – is to prevent precisely such misleading statements regarding sustainability. Under the new directive, companies must formulate and substantiate their sustainability claims in accordance with stricter rules.
Anyone who describes a cream as ‘ «’ (natural)», ‘ «’ (sustainable)» or ‘ «’ (clean)» – and thereby suggests general environmental benefits – must provide officially recognised, particularly high level of environmental performance. Furthermore, sustainability labels must be based on a certification system or be established by government bodies. Manufacturers are therefore not permitted to use sustainability labels of their own devising without such a basis. This is exactly what I had been hoping for!
For manufacturers, the new regulation initially means a lot of work – and red tape. Even supporters emphasise that the transition is labour-intensive and costly. As with many other EU regulations, there are downsides. I realise that.
However, from a consumer’s perspective, I believe it is a step in the right direction, one from which Switzerland will hopefully also benefit. Even though the EmpCo doesn’t apply here, I can well imagine that international manufacturers will use their packaging adapted for the EU market in Switzerland as well – rather than designing separate versions for the smaller Swiss market.
In Switzerland, the Federal Act against Unfair Competition (UWG) has, since the start of 2025, explicitly required verifiable evidence for climate-related claims such as ‘ «’, ‘climate-neutral’» or ‘ «’ and ‘Net Zero’». However, the EmpCo guidelines go beyond such climate-related claims and also set out specific requirements for sustainability labels.
Whether in the EU or in Switzerland: at its core, it’s about honesty. Less embellished sustainability claims create space for other, ideally more honest, statements about a product. After all, it is far more interesting for consumers to know what the cream actually is when it can no longer be described in general terms as ‘ «’ ‘natürlich’», ‘ «’ ‘nachhaltig’» or ‘ «’ ‘clean’».
There are also other selling points
What’s more, a cosmetic product doesn’t even need the label « eco» to be successful. The best example of this is Vaseline. The words ‘ «’ and ‘Petroleum Jelly’» are proudly displayed on the front of the plastic tub. Vaseline – or its main ingredient, petrolatum – is a refined by-product of the oil industry.
Nevertheless, it is a bestseller in the cosmetics sector. Here on Galaxus too. This is probably mainly because Vaseline does exactly what it promises: petrolatum has a strong occlusive effect – that is, it forms a protective layer on the skin and reduces moisture loss. This can help with rough and dry patches of skin. What’s more, Vaseline is very affordable.
Even though, as a fan of natural cosmetics, I’d rather opt for shea butter or vegetable oil than Vaseline, I respect the clear message on the packaging. Other brands could learn a thing or two from this.
Conclusion
Anyone selling me a cream with ‘green’ promises should also be able to demonstrate what’s behind them. Many natural cosmetics manufacturers have long had their products voluntarily tested against strict certification standards. I think it’s only fair to demand similar evidence from conventional manufacturers too, if they want to benefit from a green image for their products.
If a product impresses with its quality, it doesn’t need embellished environmental claims anyway. And if manufacturers can’t think of any selling points other than ‘ « ’ or ‘eco-» ’, perhaps they should focus on the contents of the tube.
«I want it all! The terrifying lows, the dizzying highs, the creamy middles!» – these words spoken by an iconic American TV celebrity could have been mine. It's a take on life I also apply to my job. What does this mean in concrete terms? That every story has its charm; no matter how small, large, exciting or trivial. The more eclectic the mix, the better.
This is a subjective opinion of the editorial team. It doesn't necessarily reflect the position of the company.
Show all
