Biodiversity claims and responsible communication

European framework 2024/825 applicable to real estate projects

Directive (EU) 2024/825 fundamentally changes how environmental approaches can be used in the communication of real estate projects.

The issue is no longer solely about the stated environmental performance, but also about the legal compliance of environmental claims made to consumers. This page aims to provide a clear, practical, and legally sound framework for using biodiversity approaches in communications by project owners, developers, and investors.

Why is the issue no longer biodiversity, but the allegation?

Directive (EU) 2024/825, known as "Empowering Consumers for the Green Transition", strengthens the fight against misleading commercial practices related to environmental claims. 

It does not judge the intrinsic ecological quality of projects.
It sets out what can be stated, how, and on what basis of evidence, when an environmental message is intended for the public.

Legal risk arises when:
 
  • This approach is presented as a comprehensive guarantee
  • A performance is extrapolated beyond its actual scope
  • or that a quality mark is perceived as an official certification without actually being one.

Typology of approaches used in biodiversity communication

Not all biodiversity initiatives are equal with regard to the requirements applicable to environmental claims.
Display labels
The labels reflect a voluntary commitment or a methodological orientation.
They do not, in themselves, constitute legally binding proof of environmental performance. They may be used in communications, subject to the following conditions:
  a clear presentation of their nature,
  • from the absence of confusion with a certification,
  • and the absence of global or absolute allegations. 
Assessment and diagnostic tools
Assessment tools allow us to analyze an initial state, compare scenarios, or inform decision-making. 

They :
 
  • do not constitute certification
  • do not guarantee results,
  • cannot be used alone as the basis for an environmental claim to the consumer.
Structured and enforceable certifications
The certifications are based on:
  
  • a formalized reference framework,
  • a documented evaluation process,
  • measurable and verifiable evidence,
  • an audit by an independent third party.
They help to substantiate certain claims within the strict limits of the audited scope, without ever allowing generalizations or absolute promises.

What a certification allows you to say (and what it doesn't allow)

An environmental certification can serve as the basis for:
  
  • a statement limited to a specific scope,
  • an objective performance,
  • demonstrable conformity to a given standard.
It does not allow:
  
  • generic claims (“exemplary”, “neutral”, “environmentally friendly”),
  • extrapolations to the entire project or territory,
  • implicit promises of overall or permanent benefit.
Any allegation must remain proportionate, verifiable and traceable.

Common communication errors identified

The following practices directly expose individuals to the risk of greenwashing as defined by Directive 2024/825:
  
  • to present a label as an official certification,
  • to discuss overall performance without accessible indicators,
  • to use a score or rating as a guarantee of results,
  • omitting to specify the phase covered (design, implementation, operation)
  • to confuse intention, means and result. 

How IRICE structures environmental evidence

IRICE structures its systems around a clear distinction between:
  
  • decision support tools , designed to inform choices upstream,
  • certifications , based on measurable, verifiable and reproducible evidence.
This approach aims to:
  • secure environmental claims,
  • to avoid any over-interpretation,
  • to protect project promoters from legal and reputational risks,
  • align communication with European requirements for fair information.

Key points to remember

Directive 2024/825 does not call into question biodiversity initiatives.

It imposes a new discipline on their commercial use . Compliance is not based on discourse, but on:
  
  • the true nature of the approach,
  • the quality of the evidence,
  • the clarity of the boundaries,
  • and transparency towards the public.

FAQ - Biodiversity claims and EU Directive 2024/825

Does Directive 2024/825 prohibit the use of biodiversity labels?

No.
The directive does not prohibit environmental labels or initiatives.
It regulates their commercial use in order to avoid any confusion about their nature, scope, and level of verification.

What is an environmental claim within the meaning of the directive?

Any statement, explicit or implicit, suggesting that a project, building, or operation offers an environmental benefit or has a reduced impact on biodiversity. This includes:
  
  • commercial texts,
  • the visuals,
  • the logos,
  • the slogans,
  • and indirect references.

Does a certification allow one to make any claim whatsoever?

No.
A certification only allows you to to base proportionate allegationsstrictly limited:
  
  • within the assessed scope,
  • at the relevant stage,
  • to the criteria actually audited.
Any extrapolation exposes one to a risk of greenwashing.

Can we communicate about a biodiversity assessment tool?

Yes, provided that:
  
  • specify that this is a decision-making tool,
  • not to present it as a guarantee of performance,
  • do not use it as the sole evidence against the consumer.
An assessment tool is not a certification.

Why are generic claims risky?

Claims such as "biodiversity-friendly", "neutral" or "exemplary":
  
  • are not measurable,
  • are not verifiable
  • they do not specify any perimeter.
They are therefore considered misleading if they are not based on accessible and objective evidence.

What evidence must be publicly accessible?

The following information must be available:
  
  • the exact nature of the approach,
  • the reference framework used,
  • the covered area,
  • the existence of third-party control,
  • the explicit limits of what is guaranteed.
Opacity is an aggravating factor in the event of an audit.

Does a certification allow one to make any claim whatsoever?

No.
A certification only allows you to to base proportionate allegationsstrictly limited:
  
  • within the assessed scope,
  • at the relevant stage,
  • to the criteria actually audited.
Any extrapolation exposes one to a risk of greenwashing.

Can we communicate about a biodiversity assessment tool?

Yes, provided that:
  
  • specify that this is a decision-making tool,
  • not to present it as a guarantee of performance,
  • do not use it as the sole evidence against the consumer.
An assessment tool is not a certification.

Why are generic claims risky?

Claims such as "biodiversity-friendly", "neutral" or "exemplary":
  
  • are not measurable,
  • are not verifiable
  • they do not specify any perimeter.
They are therefore considered misleading if they are not based on accessible and objective evidence.

What evidence must be publicly accessible?

The following information must be available:
  
  • the exact nature of the approach,
  • the reference framework used,
  • the covered area,
  • the existence of third-party control,
  • the explicit limits of what is guaranteed.
Opacity is an aggravating factor in the event of an audit.

Does the directive apply to developers and landlords?

Yes.
Once an environmental communication is addressed:
  
  • to buyers,
  • to tenants,
  • or to investors considered as consumers,
The rules of Directive 2024/825 apply in full.

Is a good environmental intention enough?

No.
The directive reasons exclusively in terms of:
  
  • effect on the public,
  • clarity of information,
  • of verifiability.
The stated intention or commitment does not exempt one from legal risk.

How can we concretely reduce the risk of greenwashing?

By systematically applying the following principles:
  
  • to precisely describe the approach used,
  • avoid sweeping promises,
  • document the evidence,
  • to clarify the limits,
  • align the discourse with what is actually demonstrated.

How does structured certification reduce this risk?

A structured certification:
  
  • imposes a framework,
  • document the evidence,
  • limits interpretations
  • and provides a legal framework for communication.
It does not eliminate the risk, but makes it controllable.

What is the rationale put forward by IRICE regarding 2024/825?

Distinguish clearly:
  
  • which falls under the category of decision support,
  • and what constitutes admissible evidence.
This separation is the condition for responsible, sustainable and legally secure environmental communication.

Operational conclusion

Directive (EU) 2024/825 does not penalize environmental ambition.

It penalizes imprecision, exaggeration, and confusion. Anticipating its application means structuring communication today based on:
  
  • clear categories,
  • verifiable evidence
  • and explicitly acknowledged limits.
Research
This site may use cookies and external scripts. Learn more