Is "eco-friendly" banned in the EU?

Yes. Under the EU Green Claims Directive, "eco-friendly" used as a standalone unqualified claim is prohibited because it is a vague general environmental claim without defined scope or evidence. You must replace it with a specific, substantiated claim such as "packaging made from 80% post-consumer recycled plastic".

Can I still use "sustainable" in my marketing?

Only when qualified and substantiated. "Sustainable" applied to a whole company or product without qualification is banned. It is acceptable when scoped to a specific, verified aspect: for example, "sustainably sourced cotton, certified by the Better Cotton Initiative".

Is "climate neutral" banned in the EU?

Yes. "Climate neutral" is explicitly listed among prohibited environmental claims under the EU Green Claims Directive because it implies a full lifecycle balance that cannot be achieved through carbon offsetting alone.

What is a self-awarded sustainability label and why is it banned?

A self-awarded label is a sustainability badge, seal, or icon created by a brand itself without independent third-party verification or public authority approval. ECGT bans these because they mislead consumers by mimicking the appearance of certified third-party standards without the underlying rigour.

Where can I check if a specific term is banned under ECGT?

Use GreenClaims Scanner to scan your website — it checks against 200+ ECGT rules including all banned terms. For a specific term lookup, refer to this list or the official ECGT Annex I text.

EU Banned Green Terms: Complete List 2026

The EU Green Claims Directive (ECGT) bans or severely restricts dozens of environmental marketing terms that were standard practice just two years ago. This is the complete, searchable reference list of banned green terms in the EU — with risk levels, the legal basis for each restriction, and compliant alternatives you can use instead.

Quick answer: Terms like "climate neutral", "carbon neutral" (without full lifecycle substantiation), "eco-friendly", "green", "sustainable" (as standalone unqualified claims), and any self-awarded labels mimicking third-party certifications are either fully banned or unacceptable without rigorous substantiation under ECGT. Full list below.

How This List Is Organised

Terms are grouped by risk level:

🔴 Banned / Prohibited: Cannot be used under any circumstances under ECGT
🟠 Restricted: Usable only with specific substantiation and disclosure conditions
🟡 High-Risk: Not explicitly banned but consistently challenged by EU enforcement authorities

Run a free scan of your website to check which of these terms appear in your current marketing. Our scanner checks against all 200+ ECGT rules automatically.

🔴 Banned Terms (Prohibited Under ECGT)

These terms are explicitly prohibited under Annex I of the Green Claims Directive or have been declared non-compliant by the European Commission's guidance documents.

Banned Term	Why Banned	Compliant Alternative
Climate neutral	Implies full lifecycle net-zero balance which cannot be achieved solely through offsetting; misleads consumers about the nature of offset schemes	"We offset X tonnes of CO₂ from [specific operations] through [named, verified scheme]" — see our climate neutral alternatives guide
Carbon neutral (standalone)	When used without specifying scope, methodology, and third-party verification — implies complete neutralisation of all emissions	"Scope 1 and 2 emissions offset through Gold Standard credits" + quantified data
CO₂ neutral	Same issues as carbon neutral; frequently used to imply full neutrality from offset purchases alone	Specific emission reduction data with verified scope
100% natural	"Natural" has no standardised legal definition in an environmental context; implies safety and ecological benefit without evidence	List specific natural ingredients or materials with percentages
Environmentally friendly (standalone)	Unqualified general claim with no defined scope or evidence requirement attached	Specific attribute: "packaging made from 80% post-consumer recycled plastic"
Eco-friendly (standalone)	Vague general claim; same legal issue as "environmentally friendly"	Qualified specific claim with evidence
Earth-friendly	Equivalent to eco-friendly; same prohibition applies	Specific environmental attribute
Planet-friendly	Vague general claim with no definitional anchor	Specific environmental attribute
Green product / green service (unqualified)	"Green" as a standalone descriptor with no qualification or evidence	"Product contains X% recycled materials; packaging is FSC-certified"
Sustainable (applied to company or product without qualification)	"Sustainable" applied broadly implies all aspects of a business or product are sustainable, which is virtually never true	"Sustainably sourced cotton, certified by Better Cotton Initiative"
Net zero (without verified science-based pathway)	Under ECGT, "net zero" claims require a verified transition plan aligned with 1.5°C science-based targets; offset-only approaches do not qualify	"Committed to net zero by 2040 per Science Based Targets initiative (SBTi)" — with published transition plan
Zero emissions	Factually impossible for virtually all commercial products and services in full lifecycle scope	"Zero direct emissions from our manufacturing process [scope 1]"
Plastic-free (when packaging contains plastic)	Factually false; constitutes straightforward deception	Accurate material composition labelling

🟠 Restricted Terms (Permitted Only With Substantiation)

These terms are not outright banned but require specific conditions, evidence, and disclosures to be used legally under ECGT and current enforcement guidance.

Restricted Term	Conditions for Permitted Use	Required Evidence
Recycled	Must specify percentage of recycled content, type (pre/post-consumer), and material	Supply chain documentation, third-party certification preferred
Biodegradable	Must specify conditions (industrial composting? home composting? marine?), timeframe, and standard met. See our biodegradable claims guide	Certified test results per relevant ISO/EN standard
Compostable	Must specify industrial vs home composting; cannot imply universal biodegradability	Certification per EN 13432 or equivalent
Renewable	Must specify what is renewable (energy source? materials?) and provide certification or documentation	Renewable Energy Certificates (RECs), supplier certificates, or equivalent
Low carbon	Must define "low" against a specific, named, current baseline with the same scope	Life cycle assessment (LCA) per ISO 14040/14044, third-party verified
Reduced carbon footprint	Must specify percentage reduction, reference year, scope, and methodology	Verified carbon footprint data; comparison period must be stated
Carbon offset	Offset claims are heavily scrutinised; must specify project type, standard (Gold Standard, VCS), vintage, and that offsetting does not substitute for direct reduction	Retirement certificates from recognised standard registry
Organic	In food/agriculture: EU organic regulation applies. In cosmetics/textiles: no single EU standard — must reference specific certification (COSMOS, GOTS, etc.)	Valid certification from recognised body
Cruelty-free	Must specify what cruelty-free means in context — no animal testing of final product? No testing anywhere in supply chain?	Certification (Leaping Bunny, PETA-approved, etc.) or explicit scope declaration
Ethical	Vague standalone use prohibited; acceptable when qualified ("ethically sourced cocoa, certified by Fairtrade")	Recognised third-party certification or specific supply chain attestation
Greener / More sustainable	Comparative claims require a defined, equivalent comparison basis — same product scope, same methodology, named competitor or "industry average" with source	Comparative LCA or independently verified benchmark data

🟡 High-Risk Terms (Frequently Challenged)

These are not explicitly banned under ECGT text but have been the subject of enforcement actions in the Netherlands, UK, Germany, and France under national laws that ECGT was designed to harmonise. Expect them to be treated as restricted or banned as enforcement matures.

"Conscious" (as in "conscious collection") — challenged by Norwegian Consumer Authority
"Responsible" without specifying what aspect and how it is measured
"Clean" in a sustainability context — no standardised definition
"Natural ingredients" in cosmetics — challenged when synthetic compounds are present; see our cosmetics greenwashing guide
"Future-proof" or "built for tomorrow" — implies long-term sustainability without evidence
"Doing our part" — aspirational language that implies active contribution without measurable commitment
"Better for the planet" — relative claim without defined comparison
"Made with love for the environment" — emotional framing with zero evidential basis
"Transparent supply chain" — only acceptable if supply chain data is actually publicly accessible

Self-Awarded Labels: A Special Risk Category

One of ECGT's most significant interventions is the prohibition on sustainability labels that are not based on a certification scheme approved by a public authority or established through clear scientific criteria. This effectively prohibits brands from creating their own sustainability badges, stars, or icons.

Examples of non-compliant self-awarded labels:

"[Brand Name] Green Seal"
"Our Sustainability Pledge — Level 3"
Custom leaf/tree icons presented as certification marks
"Verified sustainable by our team"

For a comparison of compliant third-party certifications, see our sustainability certification comparison guide.

How to Check Your Website Against This List

Manually searching every page of your website for banned terms is time-consuming and easy to miss. GreenClaims Scanner checks your entire site against this list and the full ECGT rule set automatically, flagging violations with page location and recommended remediation. See pricing — or start with a free scan today.

For guidance on what to say instead, read our sustainability claims dos and don'ts guide.