Sustainability communication is entering a new phase. Across Europe and beyond, scrutiny is increasing, expectations are rising, and companies are navigating how to communicate responsibly about their social and environmental performance. The EU Directive (EU) 2024/825 on Empowering consumers for the green transition is one visible example of this shift.
As this Directive moves towards implementation, Fair Wear is supporting member companies in preparing for these changes. And from the conversations we are having, we see that this moment is not only about meeting new requirements, it is a shared implementation challenge: how to jointly ensure that sustainability communication becomes more credible, more transparent, and ultimately more meaningful for both consumers and companies.
Clearer and stricter rules for sustainability communication
The Empowering Consumers Directive aims to protect consumers against greenwashing and unfair practices by tightening the rules around sustainability claims. By amending the Unfair Commercial Practices Directive and the Consumer Rights Directive, it explicitly targets generic and unverifiable claims, missing information on product durability, and introduces stricter rules for sustainability labels.
These developments matter. Consumers have the right to make informed choices, and companies that invest in due diligence should be able to distinguish themselves. Across our network, we recognise that clearer rules can strengthen the credibility of sustainability communication and help create a more level playing field for companies engaging seriously in HREDD.
At the same time, translating these rules into practice raises important questions and concerns. Sustainability communication does not exist in isolation. It reflects the reality of due diligence itself: an ongoing, risk-based process shaped by supply chain complexity, collaboration, and continuous learning.
Building trust in sustainability communication
In practice, communicating about due diligence is not a straightforward exercise. Across our membership base, we see companies navigating how to explain complex realities in ways that are both substantiated and understandable. This is where the challenge of building trust becomes central.
Trust in sustainability communication depends on more than avoiding misleading claims. It requires balancing accuracy with clarity, and substantiation with transparency about progress, challenges, and learning. We have members that are leading the way in this: they communicate openly about their supplier base, the factory-level risks in their supply chains and the due diligence actions they have taken to prevent, mitigate, and remediate these risks. And they are transparent about the progress on their sustainability goals, even in case of missed targets. But I also know from conversations we have been part of that when this balance is difficult to achieve, there is a risk that companies become overly cautious, choosing silence over transparency.
A similar concern applies to sustainability labels linked to certification schemes. The Directive introduces stricter rules ensuring that labels are credible and independently verified. At the same time, organisations across the sector recognise that not all sustainability approaches fit neatly into a certification model.
Certifications often rely on ‘yes-or-no’ assessments of whether standards are met. In contrast, approaches to implementing HREDD emphasise ongoing improvement and adaptation to changing contexts. Certification schemes that focus on compliance in isolation risk missing the goal; generating true impact by addressing power imbalances, systemic issues and shifting industry realities. Ensuring that rules on labels support this reality is part of the shared implementation challenge. It invites reflection on how sustainability communication can capture not only compliance with standards, but also meaningful engagement with due diligence in practice.
Beyond compliance: Communication as a lever for impact
The debate around the Empowering Consumers Directive has made me reflect on sustainability communication more broadly. In times of new legislation, I hear it often discussed as a risk; it requires courage to openly communicate about the pioneering work that HREDD so often is, where companies depend on collaboration with supply chain partners to implement risk strategies and where trial and error is part of progress. Yet, done well, reporting and communication can become a powerful tool: it can support accountability by providing clear and substantiated information about company performance. Communication is not an add-on; it is central to advancing collective learning and raising the bar across sectors.
A question for the quarter ahead
As we move into the next quarter, the key question I would like to pose is this: How can companies leverage sustainability communication for impact, not just compliance?
I look forward to continuing this conversation.
Sincerely,
– Annabel Meurs, Executive Director at Fair Wear