BetterLet's start with ourselves, otherwise this article is worthless.
BetterWorld sells clothing. We do not call it "eco-friendly"and that is not modesty. It is because we cannot prove it today: the actual material and the place of production of our products are not documented in a verifiable way.
What we can say, and what is verifiable: they are printed on demand. Nothing is made before it is sold, so there is no stock and nothing left unsold. That is a fact about the production model, not a claim about the material.
That distinction is precisely what this article is about.
The right question is never "is it responsible?" but "responsible for what?". A label answers one precise question and one only. OEKO-TEX certifies the absence of harmful substancesnot environmental impact. GOTS, by contrast, covers both environmental and social criteria across the whole chain. And a claim that says neither what, nor how much, nor compared to what commits to nothing.
The reflex"Responsible for what?"
A product can be excellent on one front and poor on every other. A t-shirt made of organic cotton grown without pesticides may have been sewn under indefensible working conditions, then flown halfway around the world.
None of those three aspects, material, labour, transport, can be inferred from the other two. That is why a label that simply says "responsible" says nothing: it does not specify on which front.
CertificationsTwo labels, two very different scopes
It is the most widespread textile label, and the most misunderstood. It certifies that the product has been tested against over a thousand harmful substances and found harmless to human health.
What it does not say: nothing about the carbon footprint, nothing about water use, nothing about manufacturing practices, nothing about working conditions, nothing about the life cycle. The organisation in fact offers separate certifications for those aspects, MADE IN GREEN and STeP.
So an OEKO-TEX garment is a garment that is safe to wear. It is not, in itself, an environmentally friendly garment.
By contrast, GOTS, the Global Organic Textile Standard, combines environmental and social requirements, human rights included, across the entire textile processing supply chain, with annual on-site audits. Its scope is far wider.
Neither is "better" in absolute terms: they answer different questions. The trouble starts when the first is presented as though it answered the question of the second.
The wordingPhrases that prove nothing
Some words appear everywhere because they cost nothing: eco-friendly, green, natural, planet-friendly, sustainably designed. On their own they commit to nothing, because they point to no measurement.
A useful claim says three things:
- what has improvedwater, emissions, lifespan, end of life;
- by how much;
- compared to whatan equivalent product, an earlier version, an industry average.
"Packaging reduced by 40% compared to our previous version" is a claim. "Eco-friendly packaging" is not.
The special case of "natural". A natural material is not automatically low-impact, conventional cotton farming is very demanding in water and pesticides. And a synthetic material is not automatically worse, especially if it is recycled and lasts longer. The word describes an origin, not a performance.
The frameworkWhat the law already requires
In Canada, an environmental claim must be neither false nor misleading, and it must be based on adequate and proper testing or substantiation where required. In June 2024, new sections were added to the Competition Act: they require businesses to hold evidence backing certain environmental claims.
The Competition Bureau takes a broad view of what counts as a claim: it can be a statement, an image or a symbol, on a product, a package or a website. The green leaf printed on a box is therefore a claim too, and it is held to the same requirements as the sentence beside it.
The principle holds well beyond any one country: a business generally remains free to say what it wants, but it must be able to substantiate what it asserts. What matters is where the burden of proof sits, and it sits with the seller, not the buyer.
Which explains something worth knowing: when a brand stays vague, it is not always lazy copywriting. Sometimes it is because a precise wording would oblige it to prove.
Take actionThree questions to ask
Not buying, repairing, or buying second-hand. No certification competes with a product that never had to be made. That is as true of our products as of anyone else's.
Frequently askedYour questions
Is an OEKO-TEX certified product environmentally friendly?
Not necessarily. The OEKO-TEX STANDARD 100 certifies the absence of harmful substances: the product is tested against over a thousand substances and found harmless to human health. It says nothing about the carbon footprint, water use, working conditions or the life cycle. OEKO-TEX offers other, separate certifications for those aspects, such as MADE IN GREEN and STeP.
What is the difference between OEKO-TEX and GOTS?
Their scope. OEKO-TEX STANDARD 100 concerns the harmlessness of the finished product. GOTS, the Global Organic Textile Standard, combines environmental and social requirements, human rights included, across the entire textile processing supply chain, with annual on-site audits. A garment can be OEKO-TEX while saying nothing about its environmental impact.
Can a business write whatever it wants on its packaging?
No. In Canada, an environmental claim must be neither false nor misleading, and it must be based on adequate and proper testing or substantiation where required. New sections added to the Competition Act in June 2024 require businesses to hold evidence backing certain environmental claims. A business generally remains free in how it communicates, but it must be able to substantiate what it asserts. And a claim is not only a sentence: an image or a symbol is one too.
Which wordings should make me wary?
Those that point to nothing measurable: "eco-friendly", "green", "planet-friendly", "natural". On their own they commit to nothing. A useful claim states what has improved, by how much, and compared to what, and it cites the certification or measurement behind it.
What about BetterWorld's own products?
We do not call them eco-friendly, because we cannot prove it today. What we can say is verifiable: they are printed on demand, so made only after purchase, with no stock and nothing left unsold. That is a fact about the production model, not a claim about the material. Until the actual material and the place of production are documented, the word stays off.
Read nextRelated articles
Sources
- OEKO-TEX STANDARD 100, what the certification covers
- Global Organic Textile Standard (GOTS), what the certification covers
- Greenwashing: guidance for businesses, Competition Bureau Canada (in French)
- Greenwashing: staying vigilant as a consumer, Competition Bureau Canada (in French)
About this article. General and educational information, accurate as of the date shown. Certification scopes change and each organisation publishes its own criteria: check them at source before basing a purchase on them. BetterWorld sells print-on-demand products and is not affiliated with any certification body.
Spotted an error or an out-of-date figure? Write to us: we will correct it and re-date the article. Our texts are written with the help of artificial intelligence and checked against official sources before publication, but an amount or a rule can change without us catching it. If anything here does not match what an official body tells you, they are right.